Comment Re:Yes, there is (probably) (Score 1) 1332
There is *no* purpose in Slashdotters pondering this little mathematical tidbit. The law has no interest in it. The law in america, where this suit takes place, defines derivative work as:
DERIVATIVE WORK - A work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a 'derivative work'. 17 U.S.C.
That certainly is open to some degree of interpretation, but it seems to me the key here is not that the torrent hash *could* be generated from the copyrighted work, but rather that it *was*. My guess is that a torrent file isn't going to count as a derivative work, but high-minded math riddles have no bearing on the situation.
DERIVATIVE WORK - A work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a 'derivative work'. 17 U.S.C.
That certainly is open to some degree of interpretation, but it seems to me the key here is not that the torrent hash *could* be generated from the copyrighted work, but rather that it *was*. My guess is that a torrent file isn't going to count as a derivative work, but high-minded math riddles have no bearing on the situation.
