From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Mar 4 4:18:23 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from stratos.net (unknown [209.119.11.209]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D97A714EB5 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 1999 04:17:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from drifter@stratos.net) Received: (from drifter@localhost) by stratos.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA29357; Thu, 4 Mar 1999 07:17:25 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from drifter) Message-ID: <19990304071725.B29308@net> Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 07:17:25 -0500 From: Rob To: cjclark@home.com Cc: mph@astro.caltech.edu, bjc23@hermes.cam.ac.uk, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: The FreeBSD Dictionary References: <19990303045313.B1500@net> <199903031635.LAA05177@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i In-Reply-To: <199903031635.LAA05177@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com>; from Crist J. Clark on Wed, Mar 03, 1999 at 11:35:43AM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Mar 03, 1999 at 11:35:43AM -0500, Crist J. Clark wrote: > Rob wrote, > > This might sound like a stupid question, but how is it possible > > to "copyright" a dictionary? I(c) mean(c), they(c) don't(c) own(c) > > the(c) words(c), do they? > > At the very least, it would seem that Webster's would be hard- > > pressed to prove that somebody "stole" their word list. > > So I could make photocopies Websters and go sell them on the corner, > and you would see no problem with that? Greg Lehey's book on FreeBSD > must not be copyrighted because he does not own FreeBSD. Likewise and > book on history, science, etc., basically any work on non-fiction must > not be copyrighted. That's not what I said. > > Compilation of those words represents many man-years of > labor. Websters or any other entity has the right to protect that hard > work from plagiarism. Fine, point taken -- though I kind of viewed the copyright law as being more geared towards the final result (in this case a, an electronic file full of a list of words and no definitions) and its uniqueness (could you copy right a book solely with nursury rhymes with no additional essays or editorials?). If people used words everyday, I wondered, how could you copyright that, no matter how much effort you spent typesetting it? > As for the last point, taking the moral highground, I see, "I know it > is wrong, but I cannot be caught, so it is OK." But wait, there is the > ol' urban legend that dictionaries put in bogus entries just to be > able to catch copyright infringments. I was not saying that it was "OK" to distribute copyrighted material. I just said the general idea of copyrighting a book whose main material is a list of words was kind of funny. I wasn't trying to make a major point, which is why I cc'd this to chat... -Rob To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message