Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: Serious breach of copyright -- First post

[Dennis Olvany]

David Hoffman wrote:
>     Now, even if you're correct that Brett doesn't have a valid
>     copyright (which he does) and that unspecified entities unknown own
>     the copyright to the article (which they don't), we still have the
>     same problem:  FreeBSD claiming to own something they don't, and not
>     even attributing it to its true authors.

Derivative work may be a bit of a stretch. A failed attempt at adopting 
your point of view that facts are actually copyrightable. Math books are 
descriptive and thus copyrightable, though the facts contained therein 
are not. The article in question is not at all descriptive. If it were, 
it would be a different story. It is a 100% factual procedure.