Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: =?windows-1252?Q?Re=3A_And_The_Award_For_Most_Legall?= =?windows-1252?Q?y-Encumbered_=93Hello_World=94_Program_=2E=2E=2E?=
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 15:42:23 -0700
Organization: albasani.net
Lines: 94
Message-ID: <is93qe$b68$1@news.albasani.net>
References: <is6v20$ib5$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <9b584a36-f160-4e01-8e2f-ca3f83f17ee4@x10g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> <is7pf9$18o$3@lust.ihug.co.nz> <5b0642c5-0634-4b8b-98fc-e9bfcbba1064@b42g2000yqi.googlegroups.com> <KhSFp.9349$rq2.8244@newsfe12.iad> <is8v1m$1a2$1@news.albasani.net> <J%TFp.6826$4h1.2947@newsfe06.iad>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.albasani.net 5O3UO/Y30uxQOMY1d5GDxoICjf61pZP8DLNf49XoKtRZAFD9gzWFkwzjM4XIW7poOfhTO++TRGXer042tsPgpQ==
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 22:45:34 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: news.albasani.net; logging-data="4Y9DST7XyVbSSC4vYNSoJugEo1mL6N2QVgIj1HYsCT7qolr8aGZOyD4OE/qkWW+07AVRL+7IwrtWco9D18ig4b2nGUspq/PFWtNiN++CrHjjBrey7D7BduYnPFYOqNOK"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@albasani.net"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10
In-Reply-To: <J%TFp.6826$4h1.2947@newsfe06.iad>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Am8dpwcEq1k5Z9r39OubmEqLHgM=
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:4908

On 6/2/2011 3:19 PM, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
> On 11-06-02 06:21 PM, BGB wrote:
>> On 6/2/2011 1:22 PM, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>>> On 11-06-02 08:34 AM, Paul Cager wrote:
>>>> On Jun 2, 11:42 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro<l...@geek-
>>>> central.gen.new_zealand>   wrote:
>>>>> In message
>>>>> <9b584a36-f160-4e01-8e2f-ca3f83f17...@x10g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> Paul
>>>>>
>>>>> Cager wrote:
>>>>>> It looks to be the standard 3-clause BSD license to me - that's a good
>>>>>> thing, isn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>> It would if the code were worth copyrighting.
>>>>
>>>> You seem to misunderstand the difference between copyright and a
>>>> license.
>>>
>>> Who's talking about a license? Oracle is attempting to copyright that
>>> HelloWorld code. Strictly speaking they didn't even have to include that
>>> "Copyright (c) 1995, 2008, Oracle..." bit, but since they did their
>>> intentions are very clear. They also refer to themselves as the
>>> copyright holder a little bit further down the blurb.
>>>
>>> Everything about that boilerplate has to do with copyright.
>>>
>>
>> but, it is worth noting a few things:
>> the text appears to be a fairly standard 3-clause BSD-style license;
>> it is generally considered to be proper withing FOSS circles to put such
>> a notice in *every* source file, such that it remains clear at all
>> points how the code in question is licensed.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_license
>>
>> note the section on the "New BSD License", which as may be noted, has
>> very similar text and style (about the only differences I see is that
>> Oracle inserted its name in the appropriate spots, labeled "<copyright
>> holder>" in the aforementioned license).
>>
>> generally, an absence of such a notice is (implicitly) meant to imply
>> that it owned by the original owner, with all rights reserved except
>> under the permission of the original author, until 80 years following
>> said author's death (under which point it goes into public domain).
>>
>> putting such a notice in a file thus states that a person is free to use
>> said "hello world" program under the stated terms (which include copying
>> and the creation of derivative works, ...). or effectively that the
>> original author is waiving some of their legal rights.
>>
>> yes, one can argue that it is a little silly to bother with this for a
>> "hello world" program, but there is no obvious malice or ill-intention
>> on Oracle's part for having done so.
>>
> Again, not discussing licensing yet, copyright applies to *original*
> works. Regardless of the exact mechanics of a copyright coming into
> force in various jurisdictions, Oracle can NOT copyright HelloWorld in
> any language, not to mention a bunch of other obvious and much-used code.
>
> I don't think they are malicious either. I simply think they have
> ignorant lawyers and cowed developers.
>

actually, it depends on how one defines "original".

AFAIK the usual working definition of original is that it was originally 
written by a certain person.

given a person can easily write out a hello world program without 
needing to go any copy code from any other source, it classifies as 
original (as opposed to a derived work, which would incorporate code 
from another source, say if one copy/pasted the "Hello World" string 
from another such example).


hence, I can go type out, say (in my own original / creatively-designed 
HLL):
import bs.io;
void main(string[] args)
{
	printf("Hello World\n");
}

and, since I was the one to write it (say, as an example for this usenet 
post), legally I can claim copyright on it.

granted, this does not mean that it is "original" in the sense that it 
involves any non-trivial behavior or creative thought (but, AFAIK, this 
is not the sense of "original" that copyright deals with).


or such...