Rune wrote:
> 
> Would you describe it as intellectual property?
> 
> Something where the author in the process of creation put his mind into it
> and made it into something unique?
> 
> That's where to draw the line IMO.
> 

I agree about that, although there may be some cases where it's difficult
to judge, it it is usually quite enough to leave this decision to the
author of the possible derivative work. He should usually feel if the
reused code represents an intellectual work or not.

Something else, i sometimes reuse others' code as a basis to create my own
one, for example start with a texture made by someone else but modify it
then.  In the end there usually is not much left from the original
texture, but anyway it's of course somehow based on his work.  I
personally feel this is not so problematic, because i myself would not be
concerned about others doing the same with my code, but i'm not sure if
this is really correct.

Any opinions?

Christoph

-- 
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other 
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message