[HOpenGL] Re: GLUT copyright violation

[Sven Panne]

Well, I've already responded to this allegation yesterday, but
obviously not to this list. Mailing in hurry is seldom a good idea...
So I'm trying to explain this once again:

Let's start with non-legal (i.e. common sense) arguments:

* I do not claim that the documentation of my GLUT binding is written
  from scratch and therefore I have included a reference to Mark's
  original work at a prominent place. Although I do not concur with
  Mark's attitude in all areas, I respect his work: Writing a simple
  but very useful library which is still in use after a decade is more
  than most people will probably achieve in their lifetime.

* I've tried very hard to stay in GLUT's spirit and made no gratuitous
  additions, which is exactly what Mark is trying to achieve with the
  status GLUT. Although sometimes a nuisance, this is why GLUT hasn't
  evolved into yet another swiss army knife library, which are so
  common these days.

* I do not earn a single cent from my binding, neither does Mark get
  any money for GLUT. And even if he did, making GLUT available to a
  broader audience would boost his income, not lessen it.

* I've tried to contact Mark several times through different channels,
  but without avail. Browsing through the links Claus has kindly
  tracked down, it is clear that Mark has lost his interest in GLUT and
  probably has a mail filter deleting everything about this topic. On
  the one hand, I can understand this, because given GLUT's widespread
  use, he is probably flooded with mails about it. But on the other
  hand this makes it nearly impossible to really sort this simple
  copyright issue out, which is a pity.

Now to the more formal arguments: Attaching a two-line copyright
statement to something isn't even remotely enough to prevent any usage
without explicit admission, so I suggest people should read a bit
before starting a copyright infringement jihad against me, e.g.

   http://www.benedict.com/info/fairUse/fairUse.asp

or the memorandum of a well-known person in her more peaceful days:

   http://fairuse.stanford.edu/rice.html

And some final words taken from
http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/499_US_340.htm :

   "[...] The primary objective of copyright is not to reward the labor
   of authors, but promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts. [...]
   To this end, copyright assures authors the right to their original
   expression, but encourages others to build freely upon the ideas and
   information conveyed by a work."

Cheers,
   S.