Legal/Permission Question

[BCS]

Reply to Walter,

> Derek Parnell wrote:
> 
>> I have occasionally wondered about the situation in which one looks
>> at code "X" and thinks 'This is horrible. I can do better' and then
>> goes on to write "Y", which looks nothing like "X" but was developed
>> with the knowledge of "X". Now, if "X" and "Y" can be used
>> interchangeably to solve the same problem, is "Y" deemed to have been
>> derived from "X"?
>> 
>> In other words, is the motive of the author a factor? In the case
>> above, "X" and "Y" are totally dissimilar but "Y" was written
>> /because/ the author knew the details of "X". If the author did not
>> know "X" but still wrote "Y", could it be a derived work?
>> 
> What will happen if things go far enough is an independent expert will
> be hired by the lawyers who will comb through the code evaluating how
> similar or dissimilar it is.
> 

And when that happens, the independent expert makes money, the lawyer makes 
money and everybody else pays them.