Forum Moderators: not2easy
If someone simple copies my CSS design, and then renames the variables....is that legit or can I someone force them to change their site design?
I know its such a small thing, but it takes time to create those to work well in different browsers etc.
It is not the list of definitions that is covered by copyright, it is the executing code.
Though I would be very interested if anyone has any caselaw WRT HTML and CSS, and whether it falls under the computer code rules.
I thought .html files (or the html source if its in a different type of file like .php etc) is also copyrighten?
The output content, the words and the pictures, will have copyright protection if they meet all the requirements.
If the within that file has the same rules apply to it as does computer code, then there are much tighter restrictions on what is copyrightable.
One of the primary factors, when it comes to compiled programs, is that the code fragment in question must generate machine code in the executable.
#define uniquevalue 97
is not copyrightable by this test because it does not generate any code in the final file.
uniquevalue = 97;
is copyrightable by this test (but not by others) because it does generate code in the compiled program.
Everything in your CSS file is like the #define. They don't actually do anything until combined with a tag.
As for most of the html "code" that will not be copyrightable because of the "efficiency" parts of software copyright caselaw.
It certainly can be done. And the use of your css class names will help in that, as will any javascript.
Software copyright is a game with a whole new set of rules when compared to literary copyright.
They don't actually do anything until combined with a tag.
BigDave, that's an interesting distinction, and if it turns out to be a significant one could be a valid argument (IMO, the first) for using inline styles over external .css files.
AffDreamer, I honestly think the best you can do in this regard is to put a comment in the css file laying your claim to the code. It may not mean much in a legal sense, but those who don't know as much about copyright as BigDave might be thwarted by the very claim to ownership.
That or write really complicated, poorly organized, comment-less css code full of non-intuitive id and class names and unnecessary use of decendant selectors. If your code isn't easy to reverse engineer, it's less likely to be stolen. I'll add, however, that I'd personally rather have layout code stolen than have it be disorganized. ;)
cEM
