RE: [dvd-discuss] Eldred v. Ashcroft Accepted for ReviewbySCOTUS

[Richard Hartman <hartman(at)onetouch.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Zulauf [mailto:johnzu@ia.nsc.com]
...
> 
> As for software,  with the source unpublished, none of the source work
> is promoting progress yet it is granted copyright protection. 
>  Escrowing
> the source serves two important purposes copyright, patent 
> and antitrust
> suits have the right to discovery of the exact source 
> comprise the base
> work for the published work.  Without this, stolen code (as 
> was the case
> in a recent e-CAD lawsuit) can lurk for years without 
> detection.  Also,
> granting a new copyright on a "mechanically derived" work 
> (compilers are
> not authors) -- requires more than "trust me... it's all 
> new." Further,
> any software patents (evil, but extant) suits need to be able 
> to examine
> the actual implementation.  Finally, the evolution of the escrowed
> source may be critical in determining "intent" in antitrust suits.  As
> secure escrow can protected trade secrets -- however a publication
> requirement of source may actually REDUCE software piracy.  How you
> ask?  If everyone publishes, then it is easy to scan your competitions
> code to ensure none of it was stolen from you -- and vice versa. 
> (actually a whole industry will arise to create and detect 
> automagically
> munged and stolen code -- but if the code mungers have to publish
> *their* source ...
> 

This brings us back again to the difference between copyright
and trade secret.  If you publish your source code, it's protected
under copyright, otherwise it's to be considered as a trade secret
and subject to the protections (and vulnerabilities) thereof.

-- 
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com

186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!