From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,12f076da4377875,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: s0222353@moncol.monmouth.edu (DEAN RUNZEL)
Subject: Legal Question: Copyrights
Date: 1995/03/29
Message-ID: <3lcs9n$c17@monmouth.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 100540720
organization: Monmouth College, W. Long Branch, NJ  07764
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1995-03-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

  I've noticed that almost everything in the PAL and other Ada repositories
include some kind of copyright notice. Usually this is pretty standard and I
think based on some standard used by GNU. In the notice, the authors usually
give permission to reuse the asset provided the notice appears unchanged. Now,
my question is:

  If I download a package and then make changes to some, but not all, of the
procedures, etc. contained in the package to create a new asset, do I have to
include the original copyright notice or should I create a new notice but
acknowledge the previous work in some other way (for example: Based on 
previous work performed by Mr. X copyright 1994)?

  I've seen packages where someone modified only a small portion of the code
and then retained the original copyright but indicated the changes via comment
lines in the header section. For an example of this, see the .l file provided
with the Aflex tool. 

  So, exactly how much must I change the original product in order to qualify
for a new copyright? 

  Specifically, for our master's thesis, our group has been tasked with
creating a lexical analyzer and parser for Ada 95 using Aflex and Ayacc. We
would like to modify existing .l and .y files from the PAL. Basically, the 
only significant changes would be in the syntax used by the parser and lex-
ical analyzer. The procedures would probably not be changed much. Would the
new .l and .y files qualify for a new copyright and how do we acknowledge
the authors of the original work?

  Any help clarifying this issue would be greatly appreciated. One of our
group members actually has a legal degree, but even he isn't sure about all
of this. Copyrights weren't his area of expertise and software is totally
new field for him. Thanks again for any help.

Dean R. Runzel
  s0222353@moncol.monmouth.edu

PS. Monmouth College in NJ officially became Monmouth University at about
    10:30 am EST on March 24, 1995. Guess that means they'll have to change
    the network name to "monuni" now. They've already changed all the other
    signs on campus. :-)