Re: [ROFL] GCC's GPLv3 "Updated License Exception"

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2009-02-03, Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> wrote:
> In gnu.misc.discuss 7 <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>> Hyman Rosen wrote:
>
>> Wrong fool!
>
> No, I think you might actually be the right one.
>
>> As I write the assembler code for how a switch statement is implemented,
>> then I have copyright over it no matter how it gets subsequently used.
>> The assembler code for the switch statement is not generated
>> 'automatically'. The exact sequence is something I have to creatively
>> interpret and put together reading CPU specification. 
>
> The degree of creativity involved in writing a few comparison and
> conditional/unconditional jump instructions is too low to merit
> copyright, just as composing the sentence "This is silly." would be.

    So then, are you going to hold your breath until they reform the Law.

    You may have a long wait since pretty much nobody that owns proprietary
source code would want to see such a reform put into place. The world is
chock full of very un-creative software.

[deletia]


-- 
        The social cost of suing/prosecuting individuals           ||| 
for non-commercial copyright infringement far outweighs           / | \
the social value of copyright to begin with.