Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #13357

Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this?

Show all headers | View raw

"Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> wrote in message
news:3b2ef384-e567-4826-afa7-b3cae7804190@m10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 28, 9:31 am, "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_h...@notemailnot.cmm>
> wrote:
...

> > ANYTHING which is REQUIRED to comply with the implementation of a
> > SPECIFICATION is NOT COPYRIGHTABLE under USA's copyright laws.
>
> That is a different subject

No, it's not.  He want's to know what he legally can put in his HELP from
the ANS Forth-94 specification.  It's not much, unless he provided the whole
thing.  Only that which is required to comply with implementation of the
Forth specification can be used without permission, or that which is so
trivially small the courts won't handle the issue.

> > What you can't do is quote entire descriptions for Forth words.
> > That would fall under copyright protections and would require you
> > to comply with their statement above about copying and changes.
>
> Except the last draft from X3J14 has different and a more permissive
> license.

I don't know what you're talking about.  "X3J14 dpANS-6 - June 30, 1993",
the last draft version I have, has no license at all, has no copyright claim
at all, both of which would be needed in order to license one to use it, as
you've claimed it's been licensed.  It has a legal disclaimer refuting all
liability for any use or misuse.

> > I'd first start by dropping the (c) mark you've placed in your HELP
> > word.  The (c) implies that it came from their material. You created
> > "dpANS FORTH94" for your Forth. Neither "dpANS" nor "FORTH94"
> > is in the standard.  "dpANS" is in some of the drafts of the standard,
> > usually with a dash and number. Even if it was from their material,
> > it is too small to qualify for copyright protection under USA's laws.
> > If you're worried, you can easily change it to something similar too:
> > FORTH-94, Forth-94, Forth 94, Forth 1994 standard, 1994 std. Forth,
> > ANS Forth, ANS-94, etc.
>
> No, that won't work, [...]

What won't work?

> [...] and I would not advise making up copyright marks.

No one is making up copyright marks.  He has made up a name for the 94
specification.  He thought it needed to be copyrighted since there is a
standard.  It doesn't.  The name he presented is his content.  It doesn't
need a copyright.  It didn't come from the standard.  But, since "dpANS" is
part of the drafts, I suggested alternate names, which are my content or his
if he uses them or makes up something else, if he is worried about some
type of copyright infringement on "dpANS".  He shouldn't be since it's not
copyrightable, i.e., too small for protection.

> Not required. Copyright has not needed to be registered
> for a number of years; it exists without it.

Yes, copyright exists under State laws without it, but only within that
State.  But, as the FAQ he quoted shows, there is basically no legal
protection in US Federal courts without a Federally registered copyright.


Rod Pemberton

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Hannu Vuolasaho <firstname.lastname@tut.fi.invalid> - 2012-06-28 00:35 +0000
  Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-06-27 14:46 -1000
  Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@invalid.com> - 2012-06-28 07:10 +0300
  Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-06-28 04:31 -0400
    Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Heikki Kallasjoki <fis+usenet@zem.fi> - 2012-06-28 08:41 +0000
      Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-06-28 09:21 -0700
      Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-06-28 18:56 -0400
    Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-06-28 09:05 -0700
      Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-06-28 18:59 -0400
        Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-06-29 04:27 -0700
          Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-06-29 22:37 -0400
            Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-06-29 22:01 -0700
        Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-06-29 13:43 +0200
          Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-06-29 22:35 -0400
            Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-06-29 20:29 -0700
        Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-06-29 08:20 -0700
    Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-06-28 19:04 +0000
  Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-06-28 02:54 -0700
    Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-06-28 03:02 -0700
      Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-06-28 06:04 -0500
      Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-06-28 12:19 +0000
        Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-06-29 00:47 +0200
      Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-06-28 19:06 +0000
      Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-06-28 08:54 -1000
    Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-06-28 08:52 -1000
  Re: Can draft standard -94 used as documentation like this? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-06-28 09:01 -0700

csiph-web