[Coco] ROM Copyrights... copyrights in general...

[Arthur Flexser]

With respect to the Unravelled series, it is notable also that the
disassembly did not include the byte values, presumably for copyright
reasons.

Art

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 2:47 PM, James Ross <jrosslist at outlook.com> wrote:

> Yes, that is a good point Salvador.  And equally good point by Dennis; I
> agree w/ his assessment and informative article.
>
> What is interesting, is this is taking place way back when Tandy/MS etc
> were still making money selling CoCo's and so were the authors of the
> Unraveled Series of books. But in this case the re-distribution of
> Copyrighted material by the books was probably helping them sell more
> CoCo’s, not less.
>
> James
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Coco <coco-bounces at maltedmedia.com> on behalf of Dennis
> Bathory-Kitsz <bathory at maltedmedia.com>
>
> On Thu, June 8, 2017 11:33 am, Salvador Garcia via Coco wrote:
> > As a
> > possible precedent, I look to the Unraveled Series of books. These
> present
> > in-depth information about the ROMs that could be considered proprietary.
>
> On the other hand, this might be considered a transformational use, and in
> those early days of software copyrights (remember software copyright
> wasn't in
> force until 1980), this would have been difficult to address. The
> transformation of binary object code to commented assembly code might have
> met
> this test. See below for examples:
>
> <http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/fair-use-what-transformative.html>
>
> Dennis
>
>
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>