[OT] Arrogant filters

NTDEV
21

Bill McKenzie wrote:

I don’t know how you could create a non-derivative work. How else could you
possibly know the correct way to create a file system related driver without
following the IFS samples, or some samples derived from the IFS samples?
The IFS IS the only source of this information.

FWIW:

A ‘‘derivative work’’ is a work based upon one or more preexisting
works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization,
fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art
reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a
work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of
editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a
‘‘derivative work’’.

17 U.S.C. sec 101.

IOW, using the instructions in the IFS kit to build your own driver
doesn’t make your driver a “derivative work”. Neither does copying the
algorithms in sample code, since copyright protects *expression* rather
than the ideas expressed.

–
Walter Oney
Wearing his Lawyer Hat for a Moment

22

>copyright protects *expression* rather than the ideas expressed.

Interesting. So, what would an example of a derived work be in this case?
A sample that wholly included an IFS sample?

–
Bill McKenzie
Compuware Corporation
Watch your IRPs/IRBs/URBs/SRBs/NDIS pkts with our free WDMSniffer tool:
http://frontline.compuware.com/nashua/patches/utility.htm

“Walter Oney” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>
> Bill McKenzie wrote:
> > I don’t know how you could create a non-derivative work. How else could
you
> > possibly know the correct way to create a file system related driver
without
> > following the IFS samples, or some samples derived from the IFS samples?
> > The IFS IS the only source of this information.
>
> FWIW:
>
> A ‘‘derivative work’’ is a work based upon one or more preexisting
> works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization,
> fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art
> reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a
> work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of
> editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
> which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a
> ‘‘derivative work’’.
>
> 17 U.S.C. sec 101.
>
> IOW, using the instructions in the IFS kit to build your own driver
> doesn’t make your driver a “derivative work”. Neither does copying the
> algorithms in sample code, since copyright protects expression rather
> than the ideas expressed.
>
> –
> Walter Oney
> Wearing his Lawyer Hat for a Moment
>
>

23

This is a pretty complex area of copyright law. Wholly including an IFS
sample would of course qualify, however merely deleting a comment, or
translating all the verbs into french, would not protect you from a
‘derivative work’ claim.

http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6366

=====================
Mark Roddy
Hollis Technology Solutions
www.hollistech.com
xxxxx@hollistech.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill McKenzie [mailto:xxxxx@compuware.com]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 1:59 PM
To: Windows System Software Developers Interest List
Subject: [ntdev] Re: [OT] Arrogant filters

copyright protects *expression* rather than the ideas expressed.

Interesting. So, what would an example of a derived work be in this case? A
sample that wholly included an IFS sample?

–
Bill McKenzie
Compuware Corporation
Watch your IRPs/IRBs/URBs/SRBs/NDIS pkts with our free WDMSniffer tool:
http://frontline.compuware.com/nashua/patches/utility.htm

“Walter Oney” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>
> Bill McKenzie wrote:
> > I don’t know how you could create a non-derivative work. How else
> > could
you
> > possibly know the correct way to create a file system related driver
without
> > following the IFS samples, or some samples derived from the IFS
> > samples? The IFS IS the only source of this information.
>
> FWIW:
>
> A ‘‘derivative work’’ is a work based upon one or more preexisting
> works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization,
> fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art
> reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a
> work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of
> editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
> which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a
> ‘‘derivative work’’.
>
> 17 U.S.C. sec 101.
>
> IOW, using the instructions in the IFS kit to build your own driver
> doesn’t make your driver a “derivative work”. Neither does copying the
> algorithms in sample code, since copyright protects expression
> rather than the ideas expressed.
>
> –
> Walter Oney
> Wearing his Lawyer Hat for a Moment
>
>

—
Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256

You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@stratus.com To
unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com

24

On Mon, 2003-08-18 at 12:59, Bill McKenzie wrote:

>copyright protects *expression* rather than the ideas expressed.

Interesting. So, what would an example of a derived work be in this case?
A sample that wholly included an IFS sample?

How about all the folks using passthru.sys and adding filtering code?
Thst’s a derivative work.

Walter is right; otherwise Microsoft would have some copyright claim in
every driver ever produced with reference to DDK samples (not just the
IFS kit).

-sd

25

Here is another, even more detailed look at precisely this issue:
http://www.pbwt.com/Attorney/files/ravicher_1.pdf

=====================
Mark Roddy
Hollis Technology Solutions
www.hollistech.com
xxxxx@hollistech.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill McKenzie [mailto:xxxxx@compuware.com]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 1:59 PM
To: Windows System Software Developers Interest List
Subject: [ntdev] Re: [OT] Arrogant filters

copyright protects *expression* rather than the ideas expressed.

Interesting. So, what would an example of a derived work be in this case? A
sample that wholly included an IFS sample?

–
Bill McKenzie
Compuware Corporation
Watch your IRPs/IRBs/URBs/SRBs/NDIS pkts with our free WDMSniffer tool:
http://frontline.compuware.com/nashua/patches/utility.htm

“Walter Oney” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>
> Bill McKenzie wrote:
> > I don’t know how you could create a non-derivative work. How else
> > could
you
> > possibly know the correct way to create a file system related driver
without
> > following the IFS samples, or some samples derived from the IFS
> > samples? The IFS IS the only source of this information.
>
> FWIW:
>
> A ‘‘derivative work’’ is a work based upon one or more preexisting
> works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization,
> fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art
> reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a
> work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of
> editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
> which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a
> ‘‘derivative work’’.
>
> 17 U.S.C. sec 101.
>
> IOW, using the instructions in the IFS kit to build your own driver
> doesn’t make your driver a “derivative work”. Neither does copying the
> algorithms in sample code, since copyright protects expression
> rather than the ideas expressed.
>
> –
> Walter Oney
> Wearing his Lawyer Hat for a Moment
>
>

—
Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256

You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@stratus.com To
unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com

26

“Roddy, Mark” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>
> … would not protect you from a
> ‘derivative work’ claim.
>

There is nothing you can do, short of not publishing a work, to protect you
from just about ANY “claim”.

Of course, the claim might be easily dismissable as unsubstantiated.

Mark’s right, though, of course. This is complicated stuff. According to
the lawyers that I’ve talked to, a great deal of the details in this area
have not been litigated – and thus remain cloudy – in large part because
nobody wants to litigate them and get bad news (i.e. discover that a
position that is useful to them is no longer tennable).

But OBVIOUSLY there has to be more than merely following directions to
consider something derivative. There are, in fact, disagreements over
whether things such as header files (assuming they do not contain things
like functions or function-like macros) can be legitimately copyrighted.
That position says that these are declarative, and contain no “expression”
as such.

Peter
OSR

27

Thanks Mark, this is really good.

Wow, this is muddy. I am not sure that a sample created even looking at an
IFS sample couldn’t be construed as being a derivative work depending on the
mood or location of the court that day. In fact, I am not sure that those
using PassThru aren’t breaking the law. Geeze, what a mess.

–
Bill McKenzie
Compuware Corporation
Watch your IRPs/IRBs/URBs/SRBs/NDIS pkts with our free WDMSniffer tool:
http://frontline.compuware.com/nashua/patches/utility.htm

“Roddy, Mark” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>
> Here is another, even more detailed look at precisely this issue:
> http://www.pbwt.com/Attorney/files/ravicher_1.pdf
>
>
>
> =====================
> Mark Roddy
> Hollis Technology Solutions
> www.hollistech.com
> xxxxx@hollistech.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill McKenzie [mailto:xxxxx@compuware.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 1:59 PM
> To: Windows System Software Developers Interest List
> Subject: [ntdev] Re: [OT] Arrogant filters
>
>
> >copyright protects expression rather than the ideas expressed.
>
> Interesting. So, what would an example of a derived work be in this case?
A
> sample that wholly included an IFS sample?
>
> –
> Bill McKenzie
> Compuware Corporation
> Watch your IRPs/IRBs/URBs/SRBs/NDIS pkts with our free WDMSniffer tool:
> http://frontline.compuware.com/nashua/patches/utility.htm
>
>
> “Walter Oney” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> >
> > Bill McKenzie wrote:
> > > I don’t know how you could create a non-derivative work. How else
> > > could
> you
> > > possibly know the correct way to create a file system related driver
> without
> > > following the IFS samples, or some samples derived from the IFS
> > > samples? The IFS IS the only source of this information.
> >
> > FWIW:
> >
> > A ‘‘derivative work’’ is a work based upon one or more preexisting
> > works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization,
> > fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art
> > reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a
> > work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of
> > editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
> > which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a
> > ‘‘derivative work’’.
> >
> > 17 U.S.C. sec 101.
> >
> > IOW, using the instructions in the IFS kit to build your own driver
> > doesn’t make your driver a “derivative work”. Neither does copying the
> > algorithms in sample code, since copyright protects expression
> > rather than the ideas expressed.
> >
> > –
> > Walter Oney
> > Wearing his Lawyer Hat for a Moment
> >
> >
>
>
>
> —
> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>
> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@stratus.com To
> unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>
>
>

28

Not to beat a dead horse here, but looking back over the WinDDK 2003 license
agreement, it is SIGNIFICANTLY different than that used for the IFS kit. I
have to assume this was intentional and intended to severely limit how IFS
samples and such are used and distributed.

–
Bill McKenzie
Compuware Corporation
Watch your IRPs/IRBs/URBs/SRBs/NDIS pkts with our free WDMSniffer tool:
http://frontline.compuware.com/nashua/patches/utility.htm

“Steve Dispensa” wrote in message
news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>
> On Mon, 2003-08-18 at 12:59, Bill McKenzie wrote:
> > >copyright protects expression rather than the ideas expressed.
> >
> > Interesting. So, what would an example of a derived work be in this
case?
> > A sample that wholly included an IFS sample?
>
> How about all the folks using passthru.sys and adding filtering code?
> Thst’s a derivative work.
>
> Walter is right; otherwise Microsoft would have some copyright claim in
> every driver ever produced with reference to DDK samples (not just the
> IFS kit).
>
> -sd
>
>
>
>
>