Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!iuvax!mailrus!ncar!ames!uhccux!lee
From: lee@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Greg Lee)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: Reasoning by analogy (was Re: Software, development & copyrights)
Message-ID: <4547@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Date: 11 Aug 89 19:38:51 GMT
References: <73@ark1.nswc.navy.mil>
Organization: University of Hawaii
Lines: 17

From article <73@ark1.nswc.navy.mil>, by dsill@relay.nswc.navy.mil (Dave Sill):
" 
" The *real* problem is that we don't have a good system of software
" publishing; i.e., one that protects the author's "intellectual
" property" and the publisher's profits without stifling creativity or
" burdening the consumer.

We used to have a good system, before the copyright law was changed to
protect binaries.  We ought to go back and require that only human
readable forms of programs can be protected by copyright directly, and
that binaries can be protected under copyright only as derivative works
from published sources.  Copyright should serve as an incentive for
making information public, as it has historically, not provide a reward
for keeping it secret.  (And referring to a firm that deals in
proprietary binaries as a "publisher" is a perversion of the term.)

			Greg, lee@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu