remark answer 2: In NL we differentiate in A. creative ownership (= always
yours) and B. operational use (= belongs to your boss). The discussion is
about how much may be changed for practical use (B) before you violate the
mental owner rights (A)

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Joyce [mailto:daniel.a.joyce at worldnet.att.net]
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 1:07 AM
To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
Subject: Re: Is a person really free if they aren't free to enslave
others ?


On Thursday 08 November 2001 03:43 pm, you wrote:
> Andrew, I don't know anything from this subject, therfor some questions:
>
> 1. Is it correct that I first have to claim copyright before I can give it
> free?

	In the US, anything you create has a automatic copyright on it for
you.
	You can thus do anything you wish with what you create.

> 2. Is it correct that my boss never can force me - even if I agree with
him
> - to give him the complete rights of my products? (I only can give away
the
> right to use/market it?)

	No, if you create something while working for a employer, in most
cases it 
is a 'work for hire' and the copyright becomes the employer's copyright. You

prettty much lose all rights to it.
	While some employers have you sign a contract stating the above, in
the 
courts, it's almost always assumed that anything you create while on company

time ( at your job ) and with company property ( computers they provide ) 
becomes property of the company.
	
> 3. Aren't there laws that forbid to violate copyright, so if I want to
> allow it i must explicit say: please change?... But doesn't question 2
> forbid that?

	Yes, the default standard for copyrights is "No copying without
permission".
	So technically, you must grant premission for copying of copyrighted

material to take place. 
	It is possible, through negligence, or if the court rules you've
been 
belligerent in using the copyright power illegally, to have your works
placed 
in the public domain. IE, you lose further rights to the work. But this is 
rare.	


> 4. Is it true that Aplle has a sleeping copyright for Squeak?
> 5. If so, what if someone in Seattle wants to buy it  for .Net?(every
> person has his price)

	Apple has a copyright on the code, but the Squeak License defines
the limits 
of the copyright. Apple has 'loosened' their rights, the Squeak License is 
much more liberal than the default rights of the law.

	About someone BUYING squeak, that depends on what the license says.

	Daniel