Item — HN Reader

Emphatically no.

First, the Directive itself is not the issue here, the harmonized standards are. Please don't mix it up.

Nobody would sue for copying the text of the Directive.

And second, it's really, really important to understand that only the national law must be followed and that it is not identical to the Directive.

I know it sounds like nitpicking, but this difference is important. Not in the day-to-day development work (because you use Directive and standards as references, but mostly your company-internal process). But as soon as you're dicussing legal matters, it's important.

[edited: fixed typo]

1 comments

That's the kind of talk that will lead to lawyers being the first against the wall when the revolution comes, right after the Marketing Department of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation.

The morality of the situation is very clear: Those standards are de facto law because they are treated by common practices as if they were the law. Hence they need to be in the public domain.

This is not an arbitrary sentiment either. You can draw a parallel to how trademarks can lose their protection by becoming part of regular language.

The morality of the situation is very clear: Those standards are de facto law because they are treated by common practices as if they were the law. Hence they need to be in the public domain.

I agree that if those standards are indeed de facto law, they should be treated like law. But that is not the case the article makes. The articles makes a case around being surprised about getting sued for publishing copyrighted material without the owner's consent. Which is not suprising at all.