On 10/24/2011 1:02 PM, Daniel Gibson wrote:
Ok, this kinda makes sense, but I guess that having been exposed to the
GPL'ed version wouldn't have made the deal impossible, just harder?
Right - not impossible, just harder.
(Couldn't they just compare the code or something?)
At the rates lawyers charge, it would be expensive.
There's always the issue that if you're intimately familiar with X, and you wish
(for legal reasons) to write an equivalent Y, it is pretty hard to make it
different. You will unintentionally make much of it pretty similar to X.
The first IBM PC BIOS had a big problem with this. They solved it by dividing
the dev team into three groups:
1. One group read the IBM PC BIOS and wrote a spec for it.
2. Another group of lawyers vetted the spec.
3. Spec was passed to a third group who implemented it, and who were not allowed
to talk to group 1 nor look at the IBM PC BIOS source in any way.
IBM was notoriously litigious and protective of their IP, but this "clean room"
technique, as it was dubbed, worked.
And the PC clone industry was thence born.
So, how far you need to go to avoid 'taint' kind of depends on how litigious and
aggressive your competitor is.
