757 lines
35 KiB
Plaintext
757 lines
35 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
COPYRIGHT LAW
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am an attorney practicing copyright law and computer law. I read a
|
|
series of queries in Net.Legal about copyright law and was dismayed to find
|
|
that people who had no idea what they were talking about were spreading
|
|
misinformation over the network. Considering that the penalties for
|
|
copyright infringement can include $50,000.00 damages per infringed work,
|
|
attorneys' fees, court costs, criminal fines and imprisonment, and
|
|
considering that ignorance is no excuse and innocent intent is not even a
|
|
recognized defense, I cringe to see the network used as a soapbox for the
|
|
ill-informed. For that reason, this article will discuss copyright law and
|
|
license law as they pertain to computer software.
|
|
|
|
My goal is to enable readers to determine when they should be concerned
|
|
about infringing and when they can relax about it. I also want to let
|
|
programmers know how to obtain copyright for their work. I'll explain the
|
|
purpose of software licenses, and discuss the effect that the license has
|
|
on copyright. For those of you who are programmers, I'll help you decide
|
|
whether you own the programs you write on the job or your boss owns them.
|
|
I will also mention trademark law and patent law briefly, in order to
|
|
clarify some confusion about which is which. Incidentally, if you read
|
|
this entire essay, you will be able to determine whether or not the essay
|
|
is copyrighted and whether or not you can make a printout of it.
|
|
|
|
This is a long article, and you may not want to read all of it. Here is an
|
|
outline to help you decide what to read and what to ignore:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART ONE: THE MEANING OF COPYRIGHT FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF THE SOFTWARE USER
|
|
|
|
0.1 A bit of history
|
|
0.2 The meaning of "copyright"
|
|
0.3 The meaning of "public domain"
|
|
0.4 A hypothetical software purchase
|
|
0.5 - 0.6 Can you use copyrighted software?
|
|
0.7 Can you make a backup copy?
|
|
0.8 Licenses may change the rules
|
|
0.9 Can you modify the program?
|
|
0.10 Can you break the copy protection scheme?
|
|
0.11 Summary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART TWO: COPYRIGHT SOUNDS NEAT -- HOW DO I GET ONE?
|
|
OR, HOW DO I KNOW IF THIS PROGRAM IS COPYRIGHTED?
|
|
|
|
0.12.1 How do you get a copyright?
|
|
0.12.2 How do you lose a copyright?
|
|
0.12.3 How do you waste a stamp?
|
|
0.12.4 Do you have to register?
|
|
0.13 How copyright comes into existence
|
|
0.14 - 0.17 The copyright notice
|
|
0.18 Advantages of registration
|
|
0.19 A test to see if you understand this article
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART THREE: WHO OWNS THE PROGRAM YOU WROTE?
|
|
|
|
0.20 Introduction
|
|
0.21 - 0.22 Programs written as an employee
|
|
0.23 - 0.25 Programs written as a contractor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART FOUR: A BRIEF WORD ABOUT LICENSES
|
|
|
|
0.26 Why a license?
|
|
0.27 Is it valid?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART FIVE: I HAVE A NEAT IDEA. CAN I TRADEMARK IT? WHAT ABOUT A PATENT?
|
|
|
|
0.28 Trademark law explained
|
|
0.29 Patent law
|
|
0.39 CONCLUSION: Where to find me for more info.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART ONE: THE MEANING OF COPYRIGHT FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF THE SOFTWARE USER
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 If you're not interested in history, you can skip this paragraph.
|
|
"Modern" copyright law first came into existence in 1570, by an act of
|
|
Parliament called the Statute of Anne. Like most laws, it hasn't changed
|
|
much since. It was written with books and pictures in mind. Parliament,
|
|
lacking the foresight to predict the success of the Intel and IBM
|
|
corporations, failed to consider the issue of copyrighting computer
|
|
programs. At first, courts questioned whether programs could be
|
|
copyrighted at all. The problem was that judges couldn't read the programs
|
|
and they figured the Copyright Law was only meant to apply to things humans
|
|
(which arguably includes judges) could read without the aid of a machine.
|
|
I saw some mythical discussion about that in some of the net.legal drivel.
|
|
Let's lay that to rest: programs are copyrightable as long as there is
|
|
even a minimal amount of creativity. The issue was laid to rest with the
|
|
Software Act of 1980. That Act modified the Copyright Act (which is a
|
|
Federal law by the way), in such a way as to make it clear that programs
|
|
are copyrightable. The few exceptions to this rule will rarely concern
|
|
anyone. The next question to arise was whether a program was copyrightable
|
|
if it was stored in ROM rather than on paper. The decision in the Apple
|
|
v. Franklin case laid that to rest: it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2 Now, what is copyright? As it is commonly understood, it is the
|
|
right to make copies of something -- or to put it the other way around, it
|
|
is the right to prohibit other people from making copies. This is known as
|
|
an exclusive right -- the exclusive right to "reproduce," in the biological
|
|
language of the Copyright Act -- and what most people don't know is that
|
|
copyright involves not one, not two, but five exclusive rights. These are
|
|
(1) the exclusive right to make copies, (2) the exclusive right to
|
|
distribute copies to the public, (3) the exclusive right to prepare
|
|
"derivative works" (I'll explain, just keep reading), (4) the exclusive
|
|
right to perform the work in public (this mainly applies to plays, dances
|
|
and the like, but it could apply to software), and (5) the exclusive right
|
|
to display the work in public (such as showing a film).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3 Before we go any further, what is public domain? I saw some
|
|
discussion on the net about public domain software being copyrighted.
|
|
Nonsense. The phrase "public domain," when used correctly, means the
|
|
absence of copyright protection. It means you can copy public domain
|
|
software to your heart's content. It means that the author has none of the
|
|
exclusive rights listed above. If someone uses the phrase "public domain"
|
|
to refer to "freeware" (software which is copyrighted but is distributed
|
|
without advance payment but with a request for a donation), he or she is
|
|
using the term incorrectly. Public domain means no copyright -- no
|
|
exclusive rights.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4 Let's look at those exclusive rights from the viewpoint of someone
|
|
who has legitimately purchased a single copy of a copyrighted computer
|
|
program. For the moment, we'll have to ignore the fact that the program is
|
|
supposedly licensed, because the license changes things. I'll explain that
|
|
later. For now, assume you went to Fred's Diner and Software Mart and
|
|
bought a dozen eggs, cat food and a word processing program. And for now,
|
|
assume the program is copyrighted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.5 What can you do with this copyrighted software? Let's start with
|
|
the obvious: can you use it on your powerful Timex PC? Is this a joke?
|
|
No. Prior to 1980, my answer might have been No, you can't use it!
|
|
And people actually pay me for advice like that! Well, think: you take
|
|
the program into RAM. What have you just done? You've made a copy in RAM
|
|
-- in legalese, you've reproduced the work, in violation of the copyright
|
|
owner's exclusive right to reproduce. (I better clarify something here:
|
|
the copyright owner is the person or company whose name appears in the
|
|
copyright notice on the box, or the disk or the first screen or wherever.
|
|
It may be the person who wrote the program, or it may be his boss, or it
|
|
may be a publishing company that bought the rights to the program. But in
|
|
any case, it's not you. When you buy a copy of the program, you do not
|
|
become the copyright owner. You just own one copy.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.6 Anyway, loading the program into RAM means making a copy. The
|
|
Software Act of 1980 addressed this absurdity by allowing you to make a
|
|
copy if the copy "is created as an essential step in the utilization of the
|
|
computer program in conjunction with a machine and ... is used in no
|
|
other manner ... ." By the way, somebody tell me what "a machine" means.
|
|
If you connect 5 PC's on a network is that "a machine" or several machines?
|
|
A related question is whether or not running software on a network
|
|
constitutes a performance. The copyright owner has the exclusive right to
|
|
do that, remember?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.7 OK, so you bought this copyrighted program and you loaded it into
|
|
RAM or onto a hard disk without the FBI knocking on your door. Now can you
|
|
make a backup copy? YES. The Software Act also provided that you can make
|
|
a backup copy, provided that it "is for archival purposes only ... ." What
|
|
you cannot do, however, is give the archive copy to your friend so that you
|
|
and your pal both got the program for the price of one. That violates the
|
|
copyright owner's exclusive right to distribute copies to the public. Get
|
|
it? You can, on the other hand, give both your original and backup to your
|
|
friend -- or sell it to him, or lend it to him, as long as you don't retain
|
|
a copy of the program you are selling. Although the copyright owner has
|
|
the exclusive right to distribute (sell) copies of the program, that right
|
|
only applies to the first sale of any particular copy. By analogy, if you
|
|
buy a copyrighted book, you are free to sell your book to a friend. The
|
|
copyright owner does not have the right to control resales.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.8 At this point, let me remind you that we have assumed that the
|
|
program you got at the store was sold to you, not licensed to you.
|
|
Licenses may change the rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.9 Now, you're a clever programmer, and you know the program could
|
|
run faster with some modifications. You could also add graphics and an
|
|
interactive mode and lots of other stuff. What does copyright law say
|
|
about your plans? Well... several different things, actually. First,
|
|
recall that the copyright owner has the exclusive right to make derivative
|
|
works. A derivative work is a work based on one or more preexisting works.
|
|
It's easy to recognize derivative works when you think about music or
|
|
books. If a book is copyrighted, derivative works could include a
|
|
screenplay, an abridged edition, or a translation into another language.
|
|
Derivative works of songs might be new arrangements (like the jazz version
|
|
of Love Potion Number 9), a movie soundtrack, or a written transcription,
|
|
or a "long version," (such as the fifteen minute version of "Wipe Out" with
|
|
an extended drum solo for dance parties). In my opinion, you are making a
|
|
derivative work when you take the store-bought word processor and modify it
|
|
to perform differently. The same would be true if you "translated" a COBOL
|
|
program into BASIC. Those are copyright infringements -- you've horned in
|
|
on the copyright owner's exclusive right to make derivative works. There
|
|
is, however, some breathing room. The Software Act generously allows you
|
|
to "adapt" the code if the adaptation "is created as an essential step in
|
|
the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine ..."
|
|
For example, you might have to modify the code to make it compatible with
|
|
your machine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.10 Moving right along, let's assume your store-bought program is
|
|
copy protected, and you'd really like to make a backup copy. You know this
|
|
nine-year-old whiz who can crack any copy-protection scheme faster than you
|
|
can rearrange a Rubix cube. Is there a copyright violation if he succeeds?
|
|
There's room to argue here. When you try to figure out if something is an
|
|
infringement, ask yourself, what exclusive right am I violating? In this
|
|
case, not the right to make copies, and not the right to distribute copies.
|
|
Public performance and display have no relevance. So the key question is
|
|
whether you are making a "derivative work." My answer to that question is,
|
|
"I doubt it." On the other hand, I also doubt that breaking the protection
|
|
scheme was "an essential step" in using the program in conjunction with a
|
|
machine. It might be a "fair use," but that will have to wait for another
|
|
article. Anyone interested in stretching the limits of the "fair use"
|
|
defense should read the Sony "Betamax" case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.11 Let me summarize. Copyright means the copyright owner has the
|
|
exclusive right to do certain things. Copyright infringement means you did
|
|
one of those exclusive things (unless you did it within the limits of the
|
|
Software Act, i.e., as an essential step...).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.12 PART TWO: COPYRIGHT SOUNDS NEAT -- HOW DO I GET ONE? OR, HOW DO
|
|
I KNOW IF THIS PROGRAM IS COPYRIGHTED?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.12.1 If you've written an original program, what do you have to
|
|
do to get a copyright? Nothing. You already have one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.12.2 If you've written an original program, what do you have to
|
|
do to lose your copyright protection? Give copies away without the
|
|
copyright notice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.12.3 If you mail the program to yourself in a sealed envelope,
|
|
what have you accomplished? You've wasted a stamp and an envelope and
|
|
burdened the postal system unnecessarily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.12.4 Do you have to register your program with the U.S.
|
|
Copyright Office? No, but it's a damn good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.13 Copyright protection (meaning the five exclusive rights) comes
|
|
into existence the moment you "fix" your program in a "tangible medium."
|
|
That means write it down, or store it on a floppy disk, or do something
|
|
similar. Registration is optional. The one thing you must do, however, is
|
|
protect your copyright by including a copyright notice on every copy of
|
|
every program you sell, give away, lend out, etc. If you don't, someone
|
|
who happens across your program with no notice on it can safely assume that
|
|
it is in the public domain (unless he actually knows that it is not).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.14 The copyright notice has three parts. The first can be either a
|
|
c with a circle around it, or the word "copyright" or the abbreviation
|
|
"Copr." The c with a circle around it is preferable, because it is
|
|
recognized around the world; the others are not. That's incredibly
|
|
important. Countries around the world have agreed to recognize and uphold
|
|
each others' copyrights, but this world-wide protection requires the use of
|
|
the c in a circle. On disk labels and program packaging, use the encircled
|
|
c. Unfortunately, computers don't draw small circles well, so programmers
|
|
have resorted to a c in parentheses: (c). Too bad. That has no legal
|
|
meaning. When you put your notice in the code and on the screen, use
|
|
"Copyright" or "Copr." if you can't make a circle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.15 The second part of the notice is the "year of first publication
|
|
of the work." "Publication" doesn't mean distribution by Osborne
|
|
Publishing Co. It means distribution of copies of the program to the
|
|
public "by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or
|
|
lending." So when you start handing out or selling copies of your precious
|
|
code, you are publishing. Publication also takes place when you merely
|
|
OFFER to distribute copies to a group for further distribution. Your
|
|
notice must include the year that you first did so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.16 The third part of the notice is the name of the owner of the
|
|
copyright. Hopefully, that's you, in which case your last name will do.
|
|
If your company owns the program -- a legal issue which I will address
|
|
later in this article -- the company name is appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.17 Where do you put the notice? The general idea is to put it where
|
|
people are likely to see it. Specifically, if you're distributing a
|
|
human-readable code listing, put it on the first page in the first few
|
|
lines of code, and hard code it so that it appears on the title screen, or
|
|
at sign-off, or continuously. If you're distributing machine-readable
|
|
versions only, hard code it. As an extra precaution, you should also place
|
|
the notice on the gummed disk label or in some other fashion permanently
|
|
attached to the storage medium.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.18 Now, why register the program? If no one ever rips off your
|
|
program, you won't care much about registration. If someone does rip it
|
|
off, you'll kick yourself for not having registered it. The reason is that
|
|
if the program is registered before the infringement takes place, you can
|
|
recover some big bucks from the infringer, called statutory damages, and
|
|
the court can order the infringer to pay your attorneys fees. Registration
|
|
only costs $10.00, and it's easy to do yourself. The only potential
|
|
disadvantage is the requirement that you deposit the first and last 25
|
|
pages of your source code, which can be inspected (but not copied) by
|
|
members of the public.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.19 Now, someone tell me this: is this article copyrighted? Can you
|
|
print it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.20 PART THREE: WHO OWNS THE PROGRAM YOU WROTE?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The starting point of this analysis is that if you wrote the program, you
|
|
are the author, and copyright belongs to the author. HOWEVER, that can
|
|
change instantly. There are two common ways for your ownership to shift to
|
|
someone else: first, your program might be a "work for hire." Second, you
|
|
might sell or assign your "rights" in the program, which for our purposes
|
|
means the copyright.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.21 Most of the programs which you write at work, if not all of them,
|
|
belong to your employer. That's because a program prepared by an employee
|
|
within the scope of his or her employment is a "work for hire," and the
|
|
employer is considered the "author." This is more or less automatic if you
|
|
are an employee -- no written agreement is necessary to make your employer
|
|
the copyright owner. By contrast, if you can convince your employer to let
|
|
you be the copyright owner, you must have that agreement in writing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.22 By the way, before you give up hope of owning the copyright to
|
|
the program you wrote at work, figure out if you are really an employee.
|
|
That is actually a complex legal question, but I can tell you now that just
|
|
because your boss says you are an employee doesn't mean that it's so. And
|
|
remember that if you created the program outside the "scope" of your job,
|
|
the program is not a "work for hire." Finally, in California and probably
|
|
elsewhere, the state labor law provides that employees own products they
|
|
create on their own time, using their own tools and materials. Employment
|
|
contracts which attempt to make the employer the owner of those off-the-job
|
|
"inventions" are void, at least in sunny California.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.23 Wait a minute: I'm an independent contractor to Company X, not
|
|
an employee. I come and go as I please, get paid by the hour with no tax
|
|
withheld, and was retained to complete a specific project. I frequently
|
|
work at home with my own equipment. Is the program I'm writing a "work for
|
|
hire," owned by the Company? Maybe, maybe not. In California, this area
|
|
is full of landmines for employers, and gold for contractors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.24 A contractor's program is not a "work for hire," and is not owned
|
|
by the company, unless (1) there is a written agreement between the company
|
|
and the contractor which says that it is, and (2) the work is a
|
|
"commissioned work." A "commissioned work" is one of the following: (a) a
|
|
contribution to a "collective work," (b) an audiovisual work (like a movie,
|
|
and maybe like a video game), (c) a translation, (d) a compilation, (e) an
|
|
instructional text, (f) a test or answer to a test, or (g) an atlas. I
|
|
know you must be tired of definitions, but this is what the real legal
|
|
world is made of. An example of a collective work is a book of poetry,
|
|
with poems contributed by various authors. A piece of code which is
|
|
incorporated into a large program isn't a contribution to a collective
|
|
work, but a stand-alone program which is packaged and sold with other
|
|
stand-alone programs could be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.25 So where are we? If you are a contract programmer, not an
|
|
employee, and your program is a "commissioned work," and you have a written
|
|
agreement that says that the program is a "work for hire" owned by the
|
|
greedy company, who owns the program? That's right, the company. But
|
|
guess what? In California and elsewhere the company just became your
|
|
employer! This means that the company must now provide worker's
|
|
compensation benefits for you AND UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.26 PART FOUR: A BRIEF WORD ABOUT LICENSES.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When you get software at the local five and dime, the manufacturer claims
|
|
that you have a license to use that copy of the program. The reason for
|
|
this is that the manufacturer wants to place more restrictions on your use
|
|
of the program than copyright law places. For example, licenses typically
|
|
say you can only use the program on a single designated CPU. Nothing in
|
|
the copyright law says that. Some licenses say you cannot make an archive
|
|
copy. The copyright law says you can, remember? But if the license is a
|
|
valid license, now you can't. You can sell or give away your copy of a
|
|
program if you purchased it, right? That's permitted by copyright law, but
|
|
the license may prohibit it. The more restrictive terms of the license
|
|
will apply instead of the more liberal copyright rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.27 Is the license valid? This is hotly debated among lawyers.
|
|
(What isn't? We'll argue about the time of day.) A few states have passed
|
|
or will soon pass laws declaring that they are valid. A few will go the
|
|
other way. Federal legislation is unlikely. My argument is that at the
|
|
consumer level, the license is not binding because there is no true
|
|
negotiation (unless a state law says it is binding), but hey -- that's just
|
|
an argument and I'm not saying that that's the law. In any case, I think
|
|
businesses which buy software will be treated differently in court than
|
|
consumers. Businesses should read those licenses and negotiate with the
|
|
manufacturer if the terms are unacceptable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.28 FINALLY, PART FIVE: I HAVE A NEAT IDEA. CAN I TRADEMARK IT?
|
|
WHAT ABOUT PATENT?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, no luck. Trademark law protects names: names of products and names
|
|
of services. (Note that I did not say names of companies. Company names
|
|
are not trademarkable.) If you buy a program that has a trademarked name,
|
|
all that means is that you can't sell your own similar program under the
|
|
same name. It has nothing to do with copying the program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.29 Patent law can apply to computer programs, but it seldom does.
|
|
The main reasons it seldom applies are practical: the patent process is
|
|
too slow and too expensive to do much good in the software world. There
|
|
are also considerable legal hurdles to overcome in order to obtain a
|
|
patent. If, by chance, a program is patented, the patent owner has the
|
|
exclusive right to make, use or sell it for 17 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.30 CONCLUSION: I know this is a long article, but believe it or not
|
|
I just scratched the surface. Hopefully, you'll find this information
|
|
useful, and you'll stop passing along myths about copyright law. If anyone
|
|
needs more information, I can be reached at (415) 932-4828, or by mail at
|
|
1225 Alpine Road, Suite 200, Walnut Creek, CA 94596. Sorry, but I do not
|
|
usually have access to the network, so you can't reach me there. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JORDAN J. BRESLOW
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
Lisa Breslow (415) 939-2400 x2418
|
|
|
|
Varian Instruments 2700 Mitchell Dr. Walnut Creek, Ca. 94598
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Press <CR> !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Press <CR> for next or type CHOICES !1
|
|
|
|
COMPUSERVE INFORMATION SERVICE
|
|
OFFICIAL STATEMENT ON COPYRIGHT POLICY
|
|
October 1986
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Note: The following statement currently is available on CompuServe.
|
|
It appears to have been produced in response to recent questions and
|
|
criticism concerning certain ambiguities in CompuServe's policy toward
|
|
"public domain" software uploads. The following text may be obtained
|
|
on CompuServe by entering GO COPYRIGHT at any ! prompt.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
The CompuServe Information Service provides more than 400 online
|
|
products covering thousands of subject areas to its more than 300,000
|
|
subscribers.
|
|
|
|
Material offered on the CompuServe Information Service
|
|
originates with a wide variety of sources, ranging from creative
|
|
public domain software programs uploaded by subscribers to
|
|
multi-faceted databases provided by large corporations.
|
|
|
|
The following information will address some commonly-asked
|
|
questions about copyright and ownership of material, particularly as
|
|
it relates to public domain information and shareware programs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
--WHAT IS A COMPILATION COPYRIGHT?
|
|
|
|
CompuServe has copyrighted the contents of the CompuServe
|
|
Information Service as a compilation copyright, just as many magazines
|
|
and newspapers reserve such a copyright on the contents of their
|
|
publications. This copyright is held in accordance with the 1976
|
|
Copyright Act of the United States.
|
|
|
|
A compilation copyright is granted when an organization collects
|
|
information in a lawful way, adds value to it, and offers it to
|
|
others. In this case, the CompuServe Information Service is a
|
|
value-added product; CompuServe Incorporated has committed substantial
|
|
financial resources to collecting more than 400 databases and offering
|
|
them in an organized, structured way to a defined user base through a
|
|
nationwide telecommunications network. The compilation copyright is
|
|
intended to protect that substantial investment from unauthorized
|
|
exploitation. This does NOT mean that CompuServe assumes ownership of
|
|
individual programs and databases provided to the system by
|
|
subscribers or information providers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
--IF I UPLOAD A SOFTWARE PROGRAM I'VE DEVELOPED TO COMPUSERVE, DO I
|
|
STILL RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF THE PROGRAM?
|
|
|
|
Yes, you do. CompuServe's compilation copyright does NOT
|
|
supersede individual ownership rights or copyrights to any of the
|
|
material furnished to the Service by subscribers or information
|
|
providers.
|
|
|
|
For example, a subscriber who creates a program and uploads it
|
|
to a CompuServe forum data library STILL OWNS that program, and may
|
|
upload it to other information services and bulletin board systems.
|
|
|
|
It should be noted, however, that CompuServe cannot grant any
|
|
redistribution rights for materials copyrighted by the author, unless
|
|
specifically authorized to do so, CompuServe does not own the material
|
|
or the copyright. These rights must be obtained directly from the
|
|
author.
|
|
|
|
|
|
--WHAT IS COMPUSERVE'S STANCE TOWARD COPYRIGHTED, PUBLIC DOMAIN, AND
|
|
SHAREWARE PROGRAMS?
|
|
|
|
Each of these types of property have special characteristics,
|
|
and deserves separate explanation:
|
|
|
|
COPYRIGHT. CompuServe does not allow copyrighted material to be
|
|
placed on the CompuServe Information Service without the author's
|
|
permission. Only the owner(s) or persons they specifically
|
|
authorize may upload copyrighted material to the Service.
|
|
Any subscriber may download copyrighted material for their own
|
|
use. Any subscriber may also non-commercially redistribute a
|
|
copyrighted program with the expressed permission of the owner or
|
|
authorized person. Permission must be specified in the document, on
|
|
the Service, or must be obtained directly from the author.
|
|
|
|
PUBLIC DOMAIN. Any subscriber may upload public domain programs
|
|
to the Service. Any subscriber may download public domain programs
|
|
for their own use or non-commercially redistribute a public domain
|
|
program.
|
|
|
|
SHAREWARE. Only the owner or an authorized person may upload
|
|
shareware programs. Any subscriber may download shareware programs
|
|
for their own use, subject to the terms provided by the owner. Any
|
|
subscriber may non-commercially redistribute a shareware program
|
|
subject to the provided terms explicitly displayed in the software
|
|
itself, or with permission of the owner or authorized person.
|
|
|
|
See below for more information about redistribution guidelines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
--AS A COMPUSERVE SUBSCRIBER, CAN I DOWNLOAD PUBLIC DOMAIN INFORMATION
|
|
AND SHAREWARE PROGRAMS FOR MY OWN USE FROM COMPUSERVE FORUM DATA
|
|
LIBRARIES?
|
|
|
|
Yes, you can. Public domain information and shareware programs
|
|
are uploaded to CompuServe data libraries by their authors for use by
|
|
other CompuServe subscribers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
--MAY I DOWNLOAD PROGRAMS FROM COMPUSERVE FORUM DATA LIBRARIES AND
|
|
SHARE THEM WITH A FRIEND, OR UPLOAD THEM TO ANOTHER BULLETIN BOARD
|
|
SYSTEM?
|
|
|
|
In keeping with the spirit of the development of public domain
|
|
information and shareware, it is not CompuServe's current policy to
|
|
prevent casual redistribution of this type of information -- this is
|
|
low volume and low frequency use or redistribution of information
|
|
where no commercialism is involved. This means that a customer may
|
|
download a file and share it with others for no commercial gain --
|
|
either via a bulletin board service, diskette, or other means.
|
|
|
|
A subscriber may not, however, download a large number of files
|
|
for redistribution via any means, nor is it acceptable for a
|
|
subscriber to update another bulletin board regularly with files
|
|
obtained from CompuServe.
|
|
|
|
It's important to note that CompuServe cannot grant
|
|
redistribution rights for programs clearly copyrighted by the author,
|
|
unless specifically authorized to do so. Such permission must be
|
|
obtained directly from the author of the program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
--MAY I DOWNLOAD AND RESELL A PROGRAM FROM A COMPUSERVE FORUM DATA
|
|
LIBRARY?
|
|
|
|
Commercial exploitation of material contained on the
|
|
CompuServe Information Service is specifically prohibited by the
|
|
CompuServe Service agreement, to which each subscriber agrees before
|
|
being permitted to access the Service. Therefore, subscribers cannot
|
|
lawfully download and redistribute public information or shareware
|
|
programs for personal gain.
|
|
|
|
In addition, mass redistribution of public domain information
|
|
or shareware is also prohibited. Mass distribution is defined as high
|
|
frequency and/or high volume transfers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
--WHAT ARE THE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATING THE COMPILATION COPYRIGHT OR
|
|
SERVICE AGREEMENT PROVISIONS?
|
|
|
|
When a situation involving exploitation is brought to
|
|
CompuServe's attention, we investigate and, if warranted, remind the
|
|
violator of the terms of the Service Agreement. If subsequent
|
|
violations are reported, access to the CompuServe Information Service
|
|
may be terminated for the violator and, in extreme cases, a letter is
|
|
sent from our legal counsel asking that he or she cease and desist, or
|
|
risk further legal action.
|
|
|
|
This is done as a positive step to protect the value and use
|
|
of the material for CompuServe Information Service subscribers, and to
|
|
discourage unauthorized redistribution of that material.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for using CompuServe!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[One user's commentary: From the above, it appears that CompuServe is
|
|
grappling with finding some way to protect its investment in
|
|
establishing and maintaining a library of user-supported materials.
|
|
The recent adoption of a policy of not charging for upload time
|
|
is a two-edged sword: it is both a boon to the subscriber who goes to
|
|
the trouble of uploading materials to CompuServe and a clear way for
|
|
CompuServe to show that it has "paid" some consideration for the the
|
|
material.
|
|
|
|
However, nothing CompuServe may do can allow it to gather in rights
|
|
which have been scattered to the public domain. As a fundamental
|
|
concept of intellectual property law, once something is placed within
|
|
the public domain, even the original author cannot reclaim it.
|
|
|
|
CompuServe would appear to be justified in its stance that it holds a
|
|
compilation copyright on its contents as a whole. It would be
|
|
difficult to argue with this position because were it not the case,
|
|
there would be little or no incentive for CompuServe to offer the
|
|
services which it does. Similarly, a number of sysops of hobbyist
|
|
bulletin boards (FIDOs, etc.) have clearly stated policies saying that
|
|
they do not favor or permit massive downloadings of files on their
|
|
systems.
|
|
|
|
CompuServe's concern appear to revolve around a need and desire to
|
|
protect its contents from being "cloned" onto a competing commercial
|
|
or non-commercial system. Unfortunately, the line between casual
|
|
redistribution and "mass redistribution" or "updating another bulletin
|
|
board regularly" is both ill-defined and subjective.
|
|
|
|
The CompuServe subscriber agreement is a much stronger protection for
|
|
CompuServe than anything in copyright law. It gives CompuServe the
|
|
simple right to suspend the subscription of anyone whom it believes is
|
|
using its services in an undesirable manner. End of story.
|
|
|
|
It is unlikely that CompuServe or any other service, be it commercial
|
|
or hobbyist supported, will survive very long unless it adds some
|
|
perceived value for its users. CompuServe's value lies in its
|
|
providing a national network, extensive libraries (both public domain
|
|
and proprietary), and a multi-user system available at all hours.
|
|
While the hobbyist bulletin boards, including FIDO and FIDO echomail,
|
|
provide similar services, they serve different (even if overlapping)
|
|
user communities.
|
|
|
|
Carl Neiburger, professional journalist and editor of the Silicon
|
|
Valley Rainbow newsletter, proposes a simple way in which anyone
|
|
uploading material to CompuServe can protect his or her interest in
|
|
the ownership and/or public domain status of the material being
|
|
uploaded:
|
|
|
|
"On the material I have uploaded to CompuServe so far,
|
|
I have chosen one of these options:
|
|
|
|
1) Omitting any copyright, making it automatically public
|
|
domain. As I understand it, CompuServe acknowledges that
|
|
public domain is public domain and that's that.
|
|
|
|
2) Attaching a copyright that, in effect, asserts authorship
|
|
but no financial control, i.e. "Free license is granted for
|
|
non-commercial use." That amounts to saying, "It's mine, but
|
|
I'm giving it away and you can give it away (but not sell it),
|
|
too." The idea is to allow broad distribution of these
|
|
programs, and I hope that CompuServe accepts this desire and
|
|
does not interfere with it.
|
|
|
|
Other people may and do upload software with their own license
|
|
restrictions. It seems to me that CompuServe's policy on
|
|
allowing downloading and distribution should be governed by
|
|
these licenses rather than the company's best guess.
|
|
|
|
At the same time, of course, authors are obliged to be realistic
|
|
and up front about their licenses and expectations, which I
|
|
think they are. I have seen, "If you like this program, send
|
|
me $10'; I haven't seen, "You just downloaded my program; send
|
|
me $200."
|
|
|
|
|
|
In conclusion, it appears that CompuServe's only intent at the moment
|
|
is to restrict the wholesale downloading of materials on its service
|
|
for the specific purpose of placing those materials in their
|
|
collective entirety on a competing commercial or non-commercial
|
|
service. CompuServe's only practical means to prevent this is to
|
|
refuse the subscription of anyone who engages in this practice.
|
|
Authors of public domain and/or shareware materials who desire
|
|
additional assurances may place appropriate copyright notices on their
|
|
materials and/or upload their materials to multiple commercial and
|
|
non-commercial services thus preventing the vesting of copyright
|
|
ownership or control in CompuServe.
|