The licenses are compatible so it's okay. On Saturday, June 15, 2013, Maxthon Chan wrote:
> Dropping my two cents since you brought it up: is it possible to (partly) > reuse CFLite for something that CB is still missing? > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 2013年6月16日, at 2:26, Stanislav Yaglo <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi. My two cents: > > The implementation of tagged pointers has been *publicly available* for a > long time in the CFLite source code from the Apple's Open Source website. > > So, it is not something new, and the fact that there was a session with > two minute talk about it at WWDC does not mean it became covered by the NDA > instantly. > > Relax, people. > > 15.06.2013, в 17:41, Robert Slower <[email protected]> написал(а): > > To add some pertinent detail, trade secrets are by definition not governed > by copyright because they are unpublished. This is a double-edged sword; > keeping a trade secret offers no protection from anyone else discovering > the secret by legal means, but it also does not expire. If you are good at > keeping your secret, you have an indefinite monopoly (examples are the > formula for Coca-Cola as well as the seasonings for KFC chicken) - but > anyone can legally duplicate it at any time and it is safe for them to do > so. However - if a trade secret is misappropriated through improper means > (like someone under NDA blabbing about it), the secret holder becomes > legally entitled to certain forms of relief, such as a court imposing > injunctions against use of the secret by the parties it was divulged to, > financial damages, and more. In certain jurisdictions, like the US, > revealing the secret is a crime in and of itself - in the US, it is a > federal crime. > > Most things I have been under NDA for have been so obvious that I don't > know why they bothered, other than to keep corporate lawyers happy. > Particularly for software, where it seems that similar ideas percolate to > the surface independently and nearly simultaneously, keeping one's mouth > shut is the surest way to keep options open for others. That consideration > is of course in addition to the plain and simple ethics of sticking to both > the letter and the spirit of any contract you have signed. If you can't or > won't keep your promises, don't make them. > > --Robert > > On Jun 15, 2013, at 6:24, Gregory Casamento <[email protected]> > wrote: > > With NDAs there is no such thing as "fair use." What you're told at WWDC > is usually considered trade secret information, particularly when they are > giving you inside information about how something is implemented. > > I am not a lawyer, so I am relying on my experience with such matters to > discuss this. NDAs typically are built on what is considered to be > proprietary or trade secret information. They typically don't cover what > is considered to be "common knowledge" that is anything you created > yourself without referring to the information covered in the NDA, anything > someone else created without improper access to the trade secret > information or anything that you can prove was commonly known to the > general public. > > That's why I was warning you. Typically it's dangerous to assume what is > and is not covered without consulting someone > > > GC > > > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 6:11 AM, Maxthon Chan <[email protected]> wrote: > > I can fair use, can't I? Their NDA is built on top of copyright. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 2013年6月15日, at 18:08, Gregory Casamento <[email protected]> > wrote: > > -- Gregory Casamento Open Logic Corporation, Principal Consultant yahoo/skype: greg_casamento, aol: gjcasa (240)274-9630 (Cell) http://www.gnustep.org http://heronsperch.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
