On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 01:58:22PM +0300, Jack L. Frost wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 02:22:29PM +0900, Simon Walter wrote:
> > Since Chung's new version is written in Python, wouldn't it be considered a
> > different piece of software? I don't think a re-write in another language of
> > something licensed under the MIT license can even be considered a
> > derivative, much less a copy.
>
> Yeah, I was going to say that too: a rewrite in another language is a
> completely new piece of software and I've see things like that being licensed
> under a different license dozens of times. Hell, full rewrites in the same
> language are often licensed differently with no problems. A full rewrite is
> just that — a different implementation, especially if it's in a different
> language as well.

For literature, it's well-established that a translation into another
language of a copyrighted work is stiill covered by the original
copyright, although the translator will also have a translation
copyright. So you have to satisfy *all* the copyright owners to be
able to publish.

However, a new work based on the same ideas is not subject to the
original copyright.

Of course, it may be hard to tell wither some things are a new works or
translations.

--- hendrik