Hey Nimrod, Well I think most of your concerns are related to patent trolls. I doubt the Cake foundation will be able to defend it's users from those, but I also doubt that they'll sue small companies where no big money is to be made. An excellent read on this topic is Paul Grahams: "Are Software Patents Evil?" <http://paulgraham.com/softwarepatents.html>. I'll leave it to the project manager (gwoo) or PhpNut_ to answer your foundation specific questions, but knowing the current team I can pretty much promise you none of us would try to file patents on CakePHP technology just to sue the CakePHP users later on. It would be a very sad day for the entire open source movement if something like this would ever happen ...
-- Felix Geisendörfer aka the_undefined -------------------------- http://www.thinkingphp.org http://www.fg-webdesign.de Nimrod A. Abing wrote: > Hello, > > I am currently doing a project for a small software firm. I want to > use CakePHP as my framework but I ran into some issues with the owner > of the project. Before I start with the details, I would like to say > offhand that I need some serious advice regarding this issue. So it > would be best if my questions were answered someone on the CakePHP > team with knowledge and understanding of how the U.S. legal and patent > system works. > > Please note that these are issues raised by my employer and we differ > slightly in our approach and opinions when it comes to using software > developed out in the open. Let's just say that he has been around long > enough to know that frivolous lawsuits can arise from the smallest > infractions and that he has been through enough lawsuits to make > himself wary. > > His concerns actually got me into thinking "What if..." as well. The > USPTO is inundated with trivial patents and patent filings. I am wary > as well that some nutjob out there with some cash, a patent portfolio, > and a website will do something similar to what Eolas did to > Microsoft. > > Okay here are his concerns as I have come to understand them: > > * Cake Software Foundation, why is it registered in Nevada? None of > the founding members seem to be from or living in Nevada. As far as he > is concerned, Nevada registered corps are usually doing something > shady or want to be "unreachable" to a certain extent. > > * Submarine patents. What's to prevent someone, I presume another corp > registered in Nevada, from suing or harassing CakePHP users with a > lawsuit. He pictures it this way... CakePHP becomes so widespread, > then some bright spark files for a patent for something that is > crucial to CakePHP and then sues or harasses CakePHP users. In the > extreme case, and I really hope this does not happen, one of the core > CakePHP developers sets up what he calls a "shy" or "sideline" company > and then files for patents and then sues or harasses CakePHP users. > > * Cake Software Foundation, again. To what extent is the foundation's > responsibilities to users of CakePHP with regards to legal actions. > Will the foundation help to defend users being harassed or sued by a > holder of a submarine patent? An attack on a CakePHP user is an attack > on CakePHP itself. It sets a precedent if the attack becomes > successful and paves the way for attacks on other CakePHP users. > > * CSL and CCSL. This one is my concern. I don't know if he has read > these documents yet. > > - How strict is the foundation in auditing and accepting contributions? > - What consists a "contribution" in this case? Patches submitted > through Trac? Whole tracts of code spanning several files? > - In either case, are contributions being audited properly to ensure > that they contain "clean IP"? > - Is the CSL or CCSL legally binding in all U.S. states? What about > worldwide? > > * Cake Software Foundation, yet again. Who are the board members? Only > the founding and team members are listed in > http://www.cakefoundation.org/pages/about when the current members are > about to be replaced, who gets to decide the replacements? How are > future board members prevented from taking the Foundation into a > different (read: evil) direction? > > That's about it with regards to the issues that need to be clarified. > Please note the following: > > * All the concerns listed above are my employer's, with the exception > of the concerns regarding CSL and CCSL (those are mine, as I wish to > contribute some patches to CakePHP someday). > > * It is not my intention to start a flamewar about these things. My > intention is to seek advise from those *in the know* so that I can > provide a case for using CakePHP on this project and future projects. > So please, make sure to check your ideologies with the big guy at the > door before responding :) > > * I would also appreciate it very much if someone were to direct me to > suitable reference online in addition to the following: > > http://www.cakefoundation.org/pages/about > http://www.cakefoundation.org/pages/cla > http://www.cakefoundation.org/pages/agreement > http://www.cakefoundation.org/pages/bylaws > > * Here are some articles he pointed out to me: > > http://www.chillingeffects.org/ecom/ - list of lawsuits involving > E-commerce sites pay special attention to the Pangea Intellectual > Properties entry. > > http://htmlfixit.com/?p=72 - one of the companies sued by PanIP. > > Eolas has been kind enough not to sue the Mozilla Foundation. It seems > to be the case in the USPTO that if you apply for a patent enough > times, eventually you will get an examiner who is too lazy to look > things up and then you get a patent. > > Thanks in advance. > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cake PHP" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
