Re: Dumping RTL???

[dewar at gnat dot com (Robert Dewar)]

> It couldn't ever be, unless you don't really mean "interface".
> Use of one work as the basic materials (ie the ideas or actual physical 
> materials from that work) to create another that does not include that 
> work does not make a derivative (Fer instance, as an an example of 
> physical materials, if I use copyrighted newspapers to make a paper 
> mache dinosaur, i've not created a derivative work of those newspapers. 

This is just a legal theory, not a statement of fact, since little of this
is statutory. I suggest reading up case law on recent copyright decisions
in software matters. It may make you less sanguine about the results. Note
that in particular there is no statutory notion of "interface", and only
a very vague and confused case law notion.

>   Same thing with the ideas part. Ideas are specifically *not* 
> protected).  As long as one can clearly delineate interfaces as the 
> idea, and the implementation as the expression, the interface is not 
> protectible.

Well we all know this is the principle, but the line between an idea
and an expression of an idea is quite flexible (look at the Coming to
America case Art Buchwald vs ??? for details).