On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Saswata Banerjee & Associates < scrapo@saswatabanerjee.com> wrote:
On 02-Jul-2010, at 10:22 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Thursday 01 July 2010 18:45:28 Saswata Banerjee & Associates wrote:
no - according to Indian law, one has to explicitly throw the work into public domain. At present he has the copyright to the application, and since he has not licensed it and given permission for people to
download,
use and modify it, anyone doing so is breaking the law.
Nopes, since he has put the details of it on a public mailing list that
is
searchable on google, etc, he has implicitly given permission to
download
and use it, not ofcourse to modify it. He still owns the copyright to
the
code.
the prosecution would argue that he has only asked people to
preview/comment
on the app and the permission to download was only for this limited
purpose.
I think you stated that he has the copyright. That means he owns the code and you can not modify or copy / distribute it. It does not mean that you can not use the software (not just code) after he has allowed a download. It would amount to saying you can not read the book he has given to you as the copyright is his.
<INAL>
you have used two sentence "read the book" & "user the software"
i think, "read the book" is well defined but "use the software" is not. For example, My 10 year friend has downloaded his code. Now he do not know how to use the software. (this include setting LAMP and launching app from client) Unless there are precise note on "How to use the software" at source code , we cannot/shouldn't assume "how to use the software". If I have a PHP to QT/Java/ruby converter then I can process his files to generate new software.
It simply means one has to provide a license which tell you about what you can do with the saftware
</INAL>
In any case, no court in India will accept the statement saying they were asked to preview and not to use. Specially not in the light of the contents of the mail he had sent and the fact that he sent it to ILUG