Re: gEDA-user: Autogeneration of schematic symbols

[Karel Kulhavy <clock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 08:58:53PM +0100, Lucas Vogelsang wrote:
> > --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> > Von: Bob Paddock <bob.paddock@xxxxxxxxx>
> > An: geda-user@xxxxxxxx
> > Betreff: Re: gEDA-user: Autogeneration of schematic symbols
> > Datum: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 07:24:49 -0500
> > 
> > On Sunday 06 November 2005 06:34 am, Werner Hoch wrote:
> > 
> > > Another thing is the legal issue. Is it allowed to use that pin
> > > descriptions or does someone see any copyright problems?
> > 
> > 99.9995%+ of data sheets have copyrights on them.  If we can't use the pin
> > descriptions then we are all screwed.

I don't know US and Swiss law, but I know securely that CZ law doesn't
allow to have copyright on anything simple like that. It has to be
proper work with obvious originality, and technical plans, mathematical
formulae etc. are explicitly taken out of copyright in the very text
of the law itself.

> > 
> 
> But how can one have a copyright on a description like:
> 
> 1: GND
> 2: CLK
> 3: Vcc
> 4: PORTD

There is no originality in
"1: GND
2: CLK
3: Vcc
4: PORTD".
It doesn't classify as author work with all the feature of originality
and statistical significance, so this is 100% legal in CZ.

> In this case it is obvious that one uses this pinout description so they
> can't say anything against this. Of course this may not be the same for very
> complex PICs but I think it should be OK to use for normal not too special

For the very complex PIC it's the same from legal point of view (at
least in CZ).

CL<
> parts.
> > 
> 
> 
> Lucas
> 
> -- 
> Highspeed-Freiheit. Bei GMX supergünstig, z.B. GMX DSL_Cityflat,
> DSL-Flatrate für nur 4,99 Euro/Monat*  http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl