linux-kernel - Yes: your code IS property. It is YOUR property.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 01 Jan 2019 23:51:25 +0000
From:   vsnsdualce@...eware.net
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gentoo-user@...ts.gentoo.org,
        ubuntu-users@...ts.ubuntu.com, debian-user@...ts.debian.org
Cc:     freebsd-women@...ebsd.org, freebsd-chat@...ebsd.org,
        misc@...nbsd.org
Subject: Yes: your code IS property. It is YOUR property.

>> he compares lending a physical object to licensing intellectual 
>> property
> Why are you still LARPing as a laywer?

>> 1015334
The foundation of this law IS in property law.

Copyright is alienable in all ways that property is (see: US Copyright 
statute).

That is where you get the ability to LICENSE software, books, music, etc 
to begin with.

The Copyright act announces that these ethereal concepts, these things 
that are not in reality something one can truly physically extend 
dominion and control (ownership) over... are never the less... to be 
treated as such.

Yes, a License, first and foremost, is a PROPERTY law concept. Property 
which you can defend, which you can build walls around, which you can 
enclose, from which you can eject trespassers.

An Idea? A song? Can one eject a tresspasser from that? Can one ever 
rape a mind of an allready-recieved idea?

Can one cut from the grasp of an interlocutor, this supposed Object ... 
a song?

No. Not in reality.

But the Copyright Act declares differently.
It declares that these incorporeal concepts be imagined to be that piece 
of land on which your stronghold sits, onwhich your implements of 
defence are trained from the high towers you have erected.

It declares that a Song, A piece of litererature, every copy there-of, 
all-in-the-same, is not a wisp upon the wind...
but a piece of land, or some personal implement such as an ax.

And that you can, indeed, cut from the grasp of some theif this ax, you 
can cut his fingers one by one until that Ax of yours falls from his 
countenance back into your possession.

And the way this is done is by the destruction of all offending 
articles: which a court may order, and or the punishment of those who 
would violate the property rights of the owner, which again the court 
may order.

So yes, intellectual property is... like a physical thing. Because the 
law says it is.

Even though you cannot even prevent yourself from knowing that which is 
thrust upon you...

Here the property owners, who came to be property owners at the fixation 
of the article (that is: when the code was written down), chose not to 
transfer their ownership in the article. Instead they, after reading the 
Copyright Act, elected to a different from of Property alienation.

A rather limited form known as a license. Permission. A temporary grant 
which, at their time of choosing, they may end.

Since this grant makes no mention of them selling off their right to 
rescind the permission, and since, indeed, forbearance of said right was 
not sold, there is no attached interest with which to bind their hand.

They may rescind.
If you don't like that: pay them for a forbearance.