Warp wrote:
>   Copyright applies to actual software source code. It does not apply to
> algorithms nor functionality. If you create a program which behaves in the
> same way as another program you are not infringing copyright, as long as
> your code is original.

I think it's a little different in the USA.  You're infringing on the 
copyright if you copied the code. It doesn't even matter if it does 
something completely different. If you learn that Creative's driver for 
some reason will run your printer too, it's still copyright infringement 
to give it out for the purposes of running the printer.

>   Claiming that making a program which interfaces with a piece of hardware
> is IP theft is absolutely ludicrous. 

If it's 98% Creative's code, with 2% changes, then it's a derivative 
work. I don't know the whole story, but this doesn't sound like he 
created a driver from scratch.  (Indeed, the way I read it almost made 
it sound like he was making Creative's drivers work on non-Creative 
cards.)  But from comments, it sounds like he took Creative's drivers 
for cards that *do* work on Vista, and back-ported the changes to cards 
that don't work on Vista.

>   But of course in the US you can sue for anything. Just threatening to
> sue is enough for most people. It's a rather effective means to scare
> people.

I was wondering - what do other countries do about this? I couldn't come 
up with any good way of solving such a problem in the legal system. It 
would have to be cultural, that you don't sue simply to intimidate someone.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message