Here is The Winsock.bas for 16-bit
Quote:
>>The courts (in the US, at least) won't allow the copyright of collections
>>of data such as telephone directories. In fact, there was a recent case
>>I heard about in which one of the CDROM phonebook publishers sued another,
>>because the second one copied the database from the first. The court
>>said "no copyright".
>>Now, whether this applies to API declarations is something that I don't
>>know -- but, given the decisions on other "collection of information" type
>>cases, I would not rule out. An API declaration is *not* an algorithim.
>But you would agree that the comments are the author's own doing, and that
>he has the copyright for that material?
The comments would be copyrightable, not much question about tha.
Quote:
>Consider this example: A record company in Norway, Arcade, regularly
>creates collections called "Absolute Music". They include the most popular
>artists in Norway at the time. The songs themselves are not Copyright
>Arcade, but on the CD it clearly states "This _compilation_ Copyright
>Arcade" (underline by me). Which means you can't copyright the public
>domain material, but you _can_ copyright the list you've compiled.
Well, they can *claim* a copyright -- which is exactly what the telephone
companies did. But when they tried to sue for infringement of their
"compilations" (the actual directory listings) they lost big time. (Where
do you think the CD phonebooks get *their* data from anyway? The phone
books!)
Quote:
>I would consider the file copyrighted because the author had to type i nthe
>declarations, debug them and add the comments. He has done something of his
>own, and that qualifies him to a copyright. IMO.
Well, he can claim copyright, but it's up to the courts to decide. Considering
previous similar cases, I'd say he probably doesn't have much chance of
protecting anything beyond his comments.
