Podcast #128: We chat with Kent C Dodds about why he loves React and discuss what life was like in the dark days before Git. Listen now.
Search type Search syntax
Tags [tag]
Exact "words here"
Author user:1234
user:me (yours)
Score score:3 (3+)
score:0 (none)
Answers answers:3 (3+)
answers:0 (none)
isaccepted:yes
hasaccepted:no
inquestion:1234
Views views:250
Sections title:apples
body:"apples oranges"
URL url:"*.example.com"
Favorites infavorites:mine
infavorites:1234
Status closed:yes
duplicate:no
migrated:no
wiki:no
Types is:question
is:answer
Exclude -[tag]
-apples
For more details on advanced search visit our help page
Results tagged with Search options answers only user 10

For questions about the property right inherent in a creative work. Please see the tag wiki and FAQ before asking the question.

0
votes
apply to wikipedia and many online forums. Private communications, at least in the U.S., are subject to full statutory copyright protection. You evince some confusion regarding what copyright protects … : It applies to fixed, creative expression. So if you read a bunch of copyrighted text, and then write something that does not directly copy text (except as subject to fair-use) then you own copyright
answered Apr 8 '18 by feetwet
2
votes
This is addressed in the terms of service: Subscriber Content You agree that all Subscriber Content that You contribute to the Network is perpetually and irrevocably licensed to Stack E …
answered Mar 26 '16 by feetwet
3
votes
Words cannot be copyrighted. Copyright law does not protect names, titles, or short phrases or expressions. Even if a name, title, or short phrase is novel or distinctive or lends itself to a … play on words, it cannot be protected by copyright. The only intellectual property protection that might be afforded to such things is trademark. …
answered Apr 25 '16 by feetwet
0
votes
Yes: images are implicitly protected by copyright. If the owners of those images allow you to use them only under a license that prohibits the modifications you have proposed then you are violating their copyright. (And you don't even posit a fair-use exemption to their copyright.) …
answered Oct 18 '17 by feetwet
1
vote
The intellectual property right held by the Greyhound bus company in the name "Greyhound" falls under trademark, not copyright. If you don't infringe the trademark, you probably won't be sued for infringing it. …
answered Jan 28 '18 by feetwet
25
votes
Wikipedia explains this well enough: Particular numbers can be trade secrets, and their reproduction and dissemination may be particularly proscribed, e.g., by the U.S. DCMA. As a coarse analogy: You …
answered May 5 '16 by feetwet
1
vote
Use of copyrighted material without license is not considered infringing if it complies with the proscriptions of fair-use, which are enumerated by both statute and case law. Without a specific examp …
answered Jan 2 '16 by feetwet
2
votes
It sounds like you are likely protected by the "fair use" doctrine against claims of infringing the original book's copyright. Furthermore, it sounds like your notes would qualify for copyright protection of their own as a "derivative work." …
answered Aug 28 '15 by feetwet
1
vote
Most software is sold as a license. If so check the terms of the license: They might provide for transfer, extension, or some other mechanism that would allow an entity other than the original licens …
answered Mar 16 '16 by feetwet
2
votes
Almost every site does this. See, for example, the bottom of your screen and read the terms and conditions linked in this text: user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution req …
answered Jun 23 '17 by feetwet
2
votes
No, you cannot ever legally use copyrighted property without a valid license from the copyright owner. It is understandable that when government restrictions prevent people from licensing …
answered Mar 12 '18 by feetwet
4
votes
Presumably you are referring to works commonly called "fan fiction." Under copyright law these might be considered "derivative works" and therefore subject to the rights of the copyright owner … . However, they might also qualify for exemption from copyright enforcement under "fair use." It appears that the legality of fan fiction is not settled law, and the outcome of legal challenges have turned on facts specific to each case. Decent background on the question is summarized on wikipedia. …
answered Oct 12 '15 by feetwet
2
votes
Given that Google (the company that owns YouTube) provides instructions for this it would seem they are offering a safe harbor if you follow their instructions, regardless of any other law. Of course …
answered Jul 20 '15 by feetwet
1
vote
Practically it appears unlikely that Polaroid can protect that border shape. In addition to the background on Polaroid's failed attempts to protect it described here, you can find borders like that i …
answered Nov 4 '15 by feetwet
4
votes
When you license your IP (like a song) you can specify the terms and conditions of its use by the licensee, including revenue shares from any derived work. However, if, as your comment suggests, you …
answered Dec 6 '16 by feetwet

15 30 50 per page