Wikipedia: History of Source code

Difference (from prior major revision) (author diff)

Changed: 51c51

Currently, court systems are deciding whether source code constitutes Constitutionally protected [free speech]? in the United States. Proponents of the free speech argument claim that because source code conveys information to programmers, can be used to play games, share humour and other artistic pursuits (see obfuscate? or visit [| PerlMonks.Org]) it is a protected form of communication. The opposing view is that source code is more functional speech than artistic, and is thus not protected by [First Amendment]? Rights of the [U.S. Constitution]?.

Currently, court systems are deciding whether source code constitutes Constitutionally protected [free speech]? in the United States. Proponents of the free speech argument claim that because source code conveys information to programmers, can be used to play games, share humour and other artistic pursuits (see obfuscated code or visit [| PerlMonks.Org]) it is a protected form of communication. The opposing view is that source code is more functional speech than artistic, and is thus not protected by [First Amendment]? Rights of the [U.S. Constitution]?.

	Revision 19 . . December 18, 2001 5:36 am by Taw [fix link to obfuscated code]
	Revision 18 . . December 18, 2001 5:31 am by Taw [s/ASCII text/flat text/]
	Revision 17 . . December 18, 2001 5:29 am by Ed Poor [condensed singular usage note]
	Revision 16 . . (edit) September 28, 2001 4:48 am by Drdick *[added source "codes" advisory]**