On Fri, 20 Dec 1996 20:56:35 -0800 "Michael C. Berch"
<mcb@postmodern.com> said:
>Well, that would be the case if the notice were actually hidden. It is
>sufficient that it be there if you look for it (for example, chip
>manufacturers embed microscopically tiny copyright notices on the chip
>mask itself so that it is imprinted onto a circuit layer when the chip
>is fabricated).
If you were to attempt to steal the technology by duplicating the mask or
maybe just by examining it to see how certain things were done, it would
just not be possible for you to miss this copyright. It is also not
possible for this copyright to be removed in the course of legitimate,
everyday use of the processor.
>A better analogy might be the copyright page (title verso) of a book;
>most people turn right past it,
But it is always included in the book, and it is a page like any other
which you read in exactly the same way. It is not the publisher's fault
if people skip it. The mail headers however are sometimes filtered long
before they reach the user's mailbox and may not be there in the first
place. When they are there at all, special expertise may be required to
display them. The user may genuinely have no clue that this information
was present at all. This confusion is caused solely by your explicit
decision to put the copyright in a place where most people will not see
it.
A better analogy is to write your copyright in a special ink that is only
visible under a neon light. Most people do have a neon light that they
could use to read the copyright, if they know about it.
Anyway this thread is going nowhere, if you think putting copyrights in
hidden headers that most people don't know how to display and some do not
even get at all offers additional protection, go ahead. It's not my data
after all.
Eric
|
|
