On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:42:56AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Adrian Colomitchi <[email protected]> writes:
> > But any other works derived from the said documentation that are used
> > *for other purposes* won't be restricted by copyright law, no matter
> > the license under which the original documentation is published.
> 
> That seems flatly false. Copyright applies (or does not apply) to a work
> regardless of the purpose the recipient has for it. If you receive a
> work under the FDL, it applies whether you want to use it as
> documentation or music or a program or whatever.

No it's not - or at least it certainly isn't always the case.

http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/13/07/23/0115242/copyright-drama-reaches-3d-printing-world

Reading through the discussion there, the general consensus seems to
be that the copyright of 3D designs do not extend to the use of
3D-printed objects.

Thinking about it logically, it would be quite silly if it were
true. Imagine the problems it would impose - may not be able to use my
own mug to drink from because I don't comply with the license of the
design, etc.

I'm sure there would be other examples outside of 3D printing where
the original copyright would not apply to works outside of the
original scope.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
Free-software-melb mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb


Free Software Melbourne home page: http://www.freesoftware.asn.au/melb/

Reply via email to