Re: Interesting article about conlangs and the law

Philip Newton skrev:
> On 9/15/07, Scotto Hlad <scott.hlad@...> wrote:
>> Since I live in Canada the laws may be a bit different. According to the
>> Canadian  Intellectual Property Office, "copyright applies to all original
>> literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works." I define my conlang as an
>> artlang. I therefore consider it a work of art and as such would be covered
>> under Canadian Copyright law.
>
> If your language (as a whole, I presume) is a work of art covered
> under copyright, would that mean that someone writing sentences in
> your artlang is producing a derivative work, which would need to be
> licensed?
>
> Or would creating a derivative work entail creating a new language
> based on yours?
>
> Cheers,

That's the question isn't it?  I almost want to suggest that we as
a group scramble some money towards getting a lawyer's opinion on
that.

/BP

Reply