Vintage Software Copyright

[Fred Cisin]

On Fri, 21 Aug 2015, Rod Smallwood wrote:
> It also brings up another issue.  When they did finally get some legal stuff 
> into place (circa 1988 over here) was it retrospective.?
> If not then by definition anything prior is not  protected and my be freely 
> distributed.

If it were changes in the law, then it would NOT be retroactive unless 
explicitly declaring itself to be.

HOWEVER, since it was "interpretation" of existing law, it would 
intrinsically be retroactive, although there would be a presumption
that actions based on current consensus would be in good faith. 
(NOT held true in Lotus V Paperback)
Fortunately, since the rulings seem to have tended to be 
primarily injunctive rather than monetary damages, it has not created a 
flood of old cases.


IANAL, do not rely on any of this.