The Death of D. (Was Tango vs Phobos)

[Steven Schveighoffer]

"Adam D. Ruppe" wrote
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:01:41AM -0400, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>  snip trademark explanation
>
> Conceded.
>
>> No, the difference is that the code is copyrighted.  If you build the 
>> code
>> from reverse engineering, it is a derivative work.  The verbal 
>> description
>> is a description of the ideas, which are not copyrightable.
>
> Would it be fair to say information about the ideas is fine to spread,
> but information about the specific implementation isn't?

Hm... depending on the information about the specific implementation, that 
might be debatable.  For example, if you wanted to have a competing library 
that used the exact same API (i.e. a swappable replacement), I'm not sure 
that would be considered infringement, as there is no way to create a binary 
compatible API without copying exactly (e.g. Lesstif).  Most likely, this 
API is described in a document, so you could potentially write a new header 
file that had the same function names, but that wasn't a copy of the 
original header file.  But surely, if you describe the exact implementation, 
it is infringement.

Description of the concepts behind the implementation should be fine.

Please note, I am not a lawyer, so don't take this as legal advice ;)

-Steve