undefined | Better HN

0 pointssandworm1016y ago0 comments

They are copyrightable as works, and even if they arent then they are as devices protecting works.

The level of creativity needed for copyright is minimal. A key pair is generated by machine, but at the request of a human according to parameters selected by the human. That is likely enough.

0 comments

saint_abroad6y ago

Since recipes are not protected under copyright law [1] it's unlikely mathematical parameter lists have sufficient "literary expression" for protection.

OTOH, a passphrase of substantial creativity [2] may be protected by copyright. Crucially (for any takedown), this would cover transformations by key derivation functions.

IANAL.

[1] https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html

[2] https://fairuse.stanford.edu/2003/09/09/copyright_protection...

sandworm101OP6y ago

A purely random number is almost certainly always beyond copyright, but as soon as someone puts limitations on that randomness a court may find that enough.

And what matters for a takedown is not the number, but the actually document being published. Github is not hosting the random number. It is hosting that number in the context of a larger document and it is that document that is subject to the takedown request. Things might be different if github hosted only the number without the associated labels and code.

steve196y ago

A key is just a long number. The AACS encryption key controversy was the subject of DCMA take downs because the key could be used to strip DRM, not because it was a number.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse