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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #92971 > unrolled thread

Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-06-21 22:00 +0200
    Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-06-21 23:58 +0300
      Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2015-06-21 15:28 -0600
        Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-06-22 01:13 +0300
        Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-06-22 12:27 +1000
          Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2015-06-21 22:23 -0600
          Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 14:45 +1000
          Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-06-22 11:20 +0200
      Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-06-22 01:02 +0300
        Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? "C.D. Reimer" <chris@cdreimer.com> - 2015-06-21 16:54 -0700
          Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-06-22 12:17 +1000
        Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 12:01 +1000
      Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2015-06-21 16:01 -0600
      Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-06-21 23:35 +0100

#92971 — Re: Do I need license to release the Python version of old BASIC games?

In a message of Sun, 21 Jun 2015 12:32:46 -0700, "C.D. Reimer" writes:

>Do I need to release my scripts under a license? If so, which one?

You should, because if you don't you could pop up some day and
assert copyright and sue the hell out of people who use your code,
which means that many people won't touch it until you license it.

http://blog.codinghorror.com/pick-a-license-any-license/

is a pretty good introduction to the quagmire, and talks about
some popular choices.

Laura

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#92975

Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se>:

> In a message of Sun, 21 Jun 2015 12:32:46 -0700, "C.D. Reimer" writes:
>
>>Do I need to release my scripts under a license? If so, which one?
>
> You should, because if you don't you could pop up some day and assert
> copyright and sue the hell out of people who use your code, which
> means that many people won't touch it until you license it.

Converting BASIC games to Python results in derived works, which are
under the original copyright of the BASIC games.

From the given link:

   BASIC Computer Games is copyright © 1978 by David H. Ahl, and is
   posted on www.atariarchives.org with permission. Do not redistribute,
   mirror, or copy this online book.

So a license from David H. Ahl is required before publishing Python
translations.

As for licensing one's own code, you can grant a license (or several),
or you could place your code in the public domain.


Marko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92977

On 06/21/2015 02:58 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se>:
> 
>> In a message of Sun, 21 Jun 2015 12:32:46 -0700, "C.D. Reimer" writes:
>>
>>> Do I need to release my scripts under a license? If so, which one?
>>
>> You should, because if you don't you could pop up some day and assert
>> copyright and sue the hell out of people who use your code, which
>> means that many people won't touch it until you license it.
> 
> Converting BASIC games to Python results in derived works, which are
> under the original copyright of the BASIC games.
> 
> From the given link:
> 
>    BASIC Computer Games is copyright © 1978 by David H. Ahl, and is
>    posted on www.atariarchives.org with permission. Do not redistribute,
>    mirror, or copy this online book.
> 
> So a license from David H. Ahl is required before publishing Python
> translations.
> 
> As for licensing one's own code, you can grant a license (or several),
> or you could place your code in the public domain.

I disagree.  Especially where the resulting python program is not a
transliteration (which it certainly won't be) of the original BASIC
programs.  As well, these programs implement well-known algorithms and
games.  There are only so many ways to implement certain algorithms, and
each implementation is going to be closely similar.  The games and
algorithms in his BASIC programs are by no means original or not
well-known and well-discussed.

Also the quoted copyright notice is for the entire work, which is to say
the book.  Chris is in no way reproducing the guy's text in whole or in
part--I note that the notice says nothing about fair use.

That's not to say the original book author couldn't pursue a copyright
claim, even if it's without merit.

As to the question of assigning a copyright license to code, in this
case I suggest just releasing the code marked as public domain.  The
programs are small and trivial.  If you do not release it explicitly as
public domain than you must release it under *some* license, because to
not do so prohibits anyone from doing *anything* with your code by
default, something a lot of githubbers seem to forget.  Also as long as
the code is entirely your work (and it is, despite Marko's assertions
about derivative works), you can change the license at any time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92982

Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com>:

> On 06/21/2015 02:58 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> Converting BASIC games to Python results in derived works, which are
>> under the original copyright of the BASIC games.
>> 
>> [...]
>
> I disagree. Especially where the resulting python program is not a
> transliteration (which it certainly won't be) of the original BASIC
> programs. As well, these programs implement well-known algorithms and
> games. There are only so many ways to implement certain algorithms,
> and each implementation is going to be closely similar. The games and
> algorithms in his BASIC programs are by no means original or not
> well-known and well-discussed.

The court will have to decide if the Python version is a
reimplementation or a more or less direct translation of the original.

> Also the quoted copyright notice is for the entire work, which is to say
> the book.  Chris is in no way reproducing the guy's text in whole or in
> part--I note that the notice says nothing about fair use.

Fair use is not granted.

   In United States copyright law, fair use is a doctrine that permits
   limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from
   the rights holders.

   <URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use>

Again, whether a fair use defense applies in this case is for the courts
to decide. My guess is it wouldn't apply here.


Marko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92991

On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 07:28 am, Michael Torrie wrote:

> As to the question of assigning a copyright license to code, in this
> case I suggest just releasing the code marked as public domain.

Public domain is not a licence, and many places (including the US) do not
allow individuals to put works into the public domain. (US government works
are a special case.) Some places will not recognise a public domain
dedication, and will treat the work as being legally copyrighted by you
with All Rights Reserved. Some legal jurisdictions prohibit owners from
surrendering some or all rights.

You might not choose to pursue a copyright claim, but your heirs might,
which means that a "public domain" release is legally unsafe unless the
work actually is in the public domain due to age.

For that reason, you are better off publishing the work with a Creative
Commons CC0 licence:

https://creativecommons.org/about/cc0

https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Public_domain


As far as whether your work counts as a derivative work, you *may* be on
solid ground if you just re-use the algorithms from the BASIC code, and not
either the author's descriptive text or the BASIC code itself. But I am not
a lawyer (neither is anyone else here).

My advice is to make an attempt to contact the original author, or at least
the atarigames website, explain that you have converted the code to Python,
and ask permission to publish under the cc0 licence or similar. It's just
safer that way.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92992

On 06/21/2015 08:27 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Public domain is not a licence, and many places (including the US) do not
> allow individuals to put works into the public domain. (US government works
> are a special case.) Some places will not recognise a public domain
> dedication, and will treat the work as being legally copyrighted by you
> with All Rights Reserved. Some legal jurisdictions prohibit owners from
> surrendering some or all rights.
> 
> You might not choose to pursue a copyright claim, but your heirs might,
> which means that a "public domain" release is legally unsafe unless the
> work actually is in the public domain due to age.

Yes of course public domain is not a source code license.  That's not
what I meant anyway.  But sure, pick some license like MIT or BSD and
call it good.

As for it being not possible to place something in the public domain,
that's news to me and certainly news to a number of projects including
Libravox. All of their recordings state that they are in the public
domain.  Of course the texts being read are in the public domain by
virtue of their copyright expiring.  But the recordings themselves could
be copyrighted, but are not.

>From some brief research, it appears there is some question about the
ability to declare something to be in the public domain, but it is by no
means a sure thing and lots of people feel it's just fine to declare
something to be in the public domain.  What his heirs try to assert is
probably not his concern nor would I worry about it.  This is wandering
in the weeds in typical python-list style!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92993

On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> wrote:
> From some brief research, it appears there is some question about the
> ability to declare something to be in the public domain, but it is by no
> means a sure thing and lots of people feel it's just fine to declare
> something to be in the public domain.  What his heirs try to assert is
> probably not his concern nor would I worry about it.  This is wandering
> in the weeds in typical python-list style!

It's a consideration for anyone who wants to make use of it. Imagine,
instead of stating that the recordings are in the public domain, it
said "Copyright, blah blah, but we pledge not to sue anyone for
copyright violation for an unspecified and unspecifiable period".
Would you use it? Because that's potentially what a "public domain"
declaration is, with the period being defined as "until the current
owner dies". That's not something to depend on, so I'd much rather
give things away under something more explicit like MIT.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92994

In a message of Sun, 21 Jun 2015 22:23:54 -0600, Michael Torrie writes:
>>From some brief research, it appears there is some question about the
>ability to declare something to be in the public domain, but it is by no
>means a sure thing and lots of people feel it's just fine to declare
>something to be in the public domain.  What his heirs try to assert is
>probably not his concern nor would I worry about it.  This is wandering
>in the weeds in typical python-list style!

No the worry about his heirs is something that the users of his code
have to worry about.  i.e. a teacher who wants to use it but needs
to get permission from the school.  The school may have a blanket
'no copyright, no use' policy, just to protect them from the
possible claims of heirs.

Laura

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92980

"C.D. Reimer" <chris@cdreimer.com>:

> Using the video output from the BASIC games in the book could fall
> underneath the fair use provision, which allows me to use a small
> portion of the book without infringing on the copyright. I'm not
> publishing a book. I just want to put my code on a website as an
> educational example of what I did to convert a spaghetti language into
> a modern scripting language.

As they say, tell that to the judge.


Marko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92987

On 6/21/2015 3:02 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> As they say, tell that to the judge. 

More than likely, the original copyright owner can issue an DMCA take 
down notice and that will be end of that.

Thanks,

Chris R.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92990

On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:54 am, C.D. Reimer wrote:

> On 6/21/2015 3:02 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> As they say, tell that to the judge.
> 
> More than likely, the original copyright owner can issue an DMCA take
> down notice and that will be end of that.

The way the DMCA is implemented in practice, anybody can issue a DMCA take
down notice and that will be the end of that.


-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92989

On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 9:54 AM, C.D. Reimer <chris@cdreimer.com> wrote:
> On 6/21/2015 3:02 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>
>> As they say, tell that to the judge.
>
>
> More than likely, the original copyright owner can issue an DMCA take down
> notice and that will be end of that.

Or, alternatively, the original copyright owner will be tickled to see
his work given a new lease on life, and will be thanking you for doing
it. That's also possible.

As long as you acknowledge the prior work, most people are happy to
see their stuff used. Slap a simple free license on your actual code
(you suggested MIT earlier, and I support that notion strongly), and
include some sort of pointer to the BASIC code and book, and most
likely the matter will never go to court. For extra safety, though, do
your best to get in contact with the original author and ask how best
to acknowledge the book. That would cover you.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92981

On 06/21/2015 03:52 PM, C.D. Reimer wrote:
> The copyright applies to the book ("Do not redistribute, mirror, or copy 
> this *online book*.") and any derivative work is based on the book. 
> Using the video output from the BASIC games in the book could fall 
> underneath the fair use provision, which allows me to use a small 
> portion of the book without infringing on the copyright. I'm not 
> publishing a book. I just want to put my code on a website as an 
> educational example of what I did to convert a spaghetti language into a 
> modern scripting language.

Completely agree. Either post code with your own copyright and pick any
license (you can change it later), such as BSD, or just release it as
public domain.  I think your work could really be a good thing for
teaching purposes.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92983

On 21/06/2015 22:52, C.D. Reimer wrote:
>
>
> On 6/21/2015 1:58 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> Converting BASIC games to Python results in derived works, which are
>> under the original copyright of the BASIC games.
>>
>>  From the given link:
>>
>>     BASIC Computer Games is copyright © 1978 by David H. Ahl, and is
>>     posted onwww.atariarchives.org  with permission. Do not redistribute,
>>     mirror, or copy this online book.
>>
>> So a license from David H. Ahl is required before publishing Python
>> translations.
>
> The copyright applies to the book ("Do not redistribute, mirror, or copy
> this *online book*.") and any derivative work is based on the book.
> Using the video output from the BASIC games in the book could fall
> underneath the fair use provision, which allows me to use a small
> portion of the book without infringing on the copyright. I'm not
> publishing a book. I just want to put my code on a website as an
> educational example of what I did to convert a spaghetti language into a
> modern scripting language.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris R.
>

Regarding fair use I suppose it depends on which country you're (plural) 
in.  From 
http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p22_derivative_works.en.htm

<quote>
Can I claim that my copy is fair use/fair dealing, or de minimis?
Unless your activities are explicitly allowed under law, there is no 
solid legal footing for such a claim.
</quote>

Having said that I agree with Michael Torrie's earlier comments so I 
suggest you get on with it, noting at the same time that my legal skills 
are nowhere near as good as my computing skills, which is really saying 
something :)

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web