News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on John Carmack on expert witnesses and 'non literal' copying. Parent comment

Re:John Carmack on expert witnesses and 'non literal' copying by sfifs on Thursday February 02, 2017 @12:38PM (#13552496)
Specifics matter in legal proceedings.

In general, this argument would be laughed out of court of course. However, Carmack worked not only in the same domain, he worked on developing the exact same product at both companies - so this opens up to potential liability.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:John Carmack on expert witnesses and 'non literal' copying by jay_kyburz on Thursday February 02, 2017 @02:55PM (#13553964)
Yes, I think it all comes down to what copyright actually is. Is it the words on the paper, or the ideas behind them?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:John Carmack on expert witnesses and 'non literal' copying by jandrese on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:39PM (#13554942)
In other words, can you commit thoughtcrime?
[ Parent | on HN ]