On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 22:14:42 +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> (One could argue that single-function packages are “trivial” from a
> copyright standpoint.  Then the subset of the npm repo containing those
> trivial packages could be viewed as a database of “facts” (which, in
> some jurisdiction, is covered by a “sui generis” right disjoint from
> copyright.))

That depends on the size/complexity of the function, but it's
interesting to consider the packaging situation in that manner.

It's also interesting to think about whether the recursive composition
of trivial (non-copyrightable) packages constitutes a copyrightable
work, and if so, at what point.  Because you'd otherwise imagine that
any program could be factored such that it is a sum of a large number of
trivial components.

I digress...

-- 
Mike Gerwitz
Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer
GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B  2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05
Old: 2217 5B02 E626 BC98 D7C0  C2E5 F22B B815 8EE3 0EAB
https://mikegerwitz.com