The /bin/true Command and Copyright (2009)

Re:The /bin/true Command and Copyright (2009) by smallnamespace on Saturday August 21, 2021 @06:29PM (#28261157)

Oral contracts are legal and valid, yet most people write down their contracts for good, practical reasons outside of strict legality.

Same goes for copyright notices. For example, the notice makes it hard for a violator to use a negligence defense, effectively increasing the penalty for violations.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The /bin/true Command and Copyright (2009) by Sebb767 on Saturday August 21, 2021 @10:21PM (#28262332)

Negligence is not applicable in this case, as, like the comment above pointed out, the default state is copyrighted.

It's a bit like putting a "stealing this car is illegal"-sticker on your car - sure, you made that clear, but "I didn't know stealing this car was illegal" is not going to fly as a defense either way.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The /bin/true Command and Copyright (2009) by paulddraper on Saturday August 21, 2021 @08:13PM (#28261784)

People write down contracts for proof. Without that, it's dubious if the contract even existed.

But proof is not relevant for a copyright. Even without writing, the existence of the copyright is not in doubt.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The /bin/true Command and Copyright (2009) by kbutler on Saturday August 21, 2021 @10:04PM (#28262254)

But the owner of the copyright is.

[ Parent | on HN ]