Re: SCO identifies code?

From: Bijan Soleymani (bijan_at_psq.com)
Date: 08/19/03

  • Next message: Bijan Soleymani: "SCO System V for Linux WTF!!!" 
    Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 21:33:03 -0400
To: Alex Malinovich <demonbane@the-love-shack.net>

    On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 07:51:00PM -0500, Alex Malinovich wrote:
    > On Mon, 2003-08-18 at 19:36, Bill Moseley wrote:
    > --snip
    > > I assume most here agree it's absurd to think you can't have "free"
    > > software? Isn't that what SCO is now claiming, that US copyright law
    > > "supercedes(sic) the GPL" -- so you can't write "free" software?
    >
    > Welcome to the wonderful world of 'intellectual property' in the US. As
    > an example here:
    >
    > My previous employer had a contract provision that stated that any and
    > all code I write while employed there was owned by the corporation. One
    > of the things I wrote there was a library for Visual Basic (I couldn't
    > help it! They made me do it! May RMS have mercy on my soul! :) which
    > would parse a text box for numbers and arithmetic symbols and perform
    > the appropriate calculations on it. No one else so much as contributed a
    > comment to this code other than myself.
    >
    > Now, if for some reason, unfathomable as it may seem, I choose to write
    > a program in VB again and I use the same code that I used in the
    > library, and then release the program under the GPL, I would be in
    > violation of my previous employer's intellectual property rights and
    > would, therefore, risk making my entire program 'illegal'.

    This makes a lot of sense. I mean if the FSF hired you to write a
    GPL program, they wouldn't want you to release a proprietary version of
    it after you quit working for them.

    Or another example, Microsoft has said they will stop supporting outlook
    express. It's dead and gone. Now imagine all the guys who worked on it
    decided to GPL the program. I mean if copyright law allowed that we
    woulnd't need a Free Software Foundation. We could just Free all the
    software in the world through hopeful thinking.

    What's more extreme is the view that *any code* you write while being
    employed by them is their property. Even code you write in your spare
    time. I mean I think to some extent this can be defended especially if
    it's in the same field. Because you could slack off on your real work
    and do your version of the thing on the side for profit.

    Example the guys working at ebay start their own auction site (in direct
    competition with ebay) on the side and spend their spare time working on
    that. How moral is that? I mean that doesn't even have to do with
    copyright so much as common sense.

    I mean copyright law may be evil, but at least it's consistent. (It
    looks out for the rich guys hiring people to write software.)

    Bijan 

    


    -- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
  • Next message: Bijan Soleymani: "SCO System V for Linux WTF!!!"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Music: Rent v Own
      ... You also are straying from copyright law, and are entering into the area of patents again, thus trying to muddy up the waters. ... The whole purpose of IP laws is to provide>exclusionary< legal mechanisms to prevent others from pursuing avenues of reasearch & development, and essentially, are a form of special protectionism. ... Intellectual property is no more an artificial construct than physical property. ... Furthermore, works of art licensing should follow the *licensee*, and not the distribution medium alone, and be limited to a *one* license per *individual end user* basis. ...
      (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
    • Re: Pystar costs the same...
      ... I will interpret the legality of Apple's EULA as I see fit. ... If I then choose to license that technology to you and you choose to ... other intellectual property) and put in the EULA that the purchaser may only ... While copyright law does give you a right to protect your intellectual ...
      (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
    • Re: Defending Googles licence to print
      ... ignorant IT person who thinks you can apply the same models to software development and the arts. ... If it were the United Nations Econmic and Social Development people doing it, with opt-in clauses, which obeyed standard international copyright law, then yes, why not? ...
      (alt.internet.search-engines)
    • Re: Carmen Jones Question
      ... The concept of intellectual property is directly contrary to the ideals ... Every copyright law of any term would be unconstitutional (ie, ... The Supreme Court threw it out ... All it cares is that the legislature ...
      (rec.music.opera)
    • Re: FC4 or FC5
      ... The FSF interpretation says otherwise. ... If you think your interpretation of copyright law is better than the ... the way copyright and every other license works. ... Yes, the GPL only applies if you make a derivative work, so what? ...
      (Fedora)
    Loading