Copyleft/guide
6
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Correct ' signs in these places.

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Bradley M. Kuhn 2014-03-20 20:36:14 -04:00 committed by donaldr3
parent a394bce20f
commit 6f718b34bb
1 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

6
gpl-lgpl.tex
View file

@ -1374,12 +1374,12 @@ of derivative work for software in comparison to other circuits. Specifically,
the
First Circuit holds that ``method of operation,'' as used in \S~102(b) of
the Copyright Act, refers to the means by which users operate
computers. Lotus Development Corp. v. Borland Int’l., Inc., 49 F.3d 807
computers. Lotus Development Corp. v. Borland Int'l., Inc., 49 F.3d 807
(1st Cir. 1995). In Lotus, the court held that a menu command
hierarchy for a computer program was uncopyrightable because it did not
merely explain and present the program’s functional capabilities to the
merely explain and present the program's functional capabilities to the
user, but also served as a method by which the program was operated and
controlled. As a result, under the First Circuit’s test, literal copying
controlled. As a result, under the First Circuit's test, literal copying
of a menu command hierarchy, or any other ``method of operation,'' cannot
form the basis for a determination that one work is a derivative of
another. As a result, courts in the First Circuit that apply the AFC test