Fools fighting over scraps while the m$ buzzards eat caviar
Jacob Nikom wrote:
> I still cannot completely agree with Brian - credit not
> "should be given", but must be given. If you work for the
> company and you patented something, the company owns the
> patent, but you still own your name on the patent. Company
> cannot change it, otherwise the patent will be invalidated.
>
> Sun owns the code, but I think they don't own the name of
> the person who produced that code. They cannot change it.
> There is something here.
>
> I worked for software companies for many years and always
> compared myself with ancient egyptian worker who built egyptian
> pyramids. Everybody admires them, but nobody knows who built
> them.
>
> With open source movement the situation is changing. However,
> I am not sure that Sun's community license and even GPL pay
> enough attention to the name ownership. Otherwise, we would
> not have "GNU/Linux" discussion, because both use GPL.
> Code released under my name promotes me and makes me responsible
> for it.
>
> Michael Young gave his IPO shares to some Linux developers years
> after they did their work. It created good precedent for Blackdown
> team. Who knows, may be McNealy is going to do something like that
> in the future?
>
> Jacob Nikom
>
> Brian Pomerantz wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 07, 1999 at 06:28:29PM -0500, Jacob Nikom wrote:
> > > But it does matter how it was claimed. If the work was done by
> > > Inprise it is one thing, if it is only relabeling of Blackdown
> > > code, it is another.
> >
> > I was speaking from a legal standpoint. According to Sun's brain-dead
> > license, they own all changes to derivative works. I agree that
> > credit should be given where it is due.
> >
> > >
> > > This is the text:
> > > "Inprise and Sun Microsystems have taken a big step toward
> > > maintaining open, standards-based network computing architectures
> > > that utilize technologies like Linux and the Java 2 platform,"
> > > said Dale Fuller, Interim CEO and President of Inprise."
> > >
> > >
> > > I think it is the drawback of the "Open Source" model. Technically,
> > > you can take any code and release it as yours after few changes.
> > >
> > > It is interesting what guys from Inprise think about it?
> > >
> >
> > I think it is actually a drawback to the marketing departments not
> > knowing much of anything on what they create press releases out of.
> > Having worked at a place that was always trying to pull a press
> > release out of thin air, I've seen how the most innocent comment or
> > piece of fluff can be made to sound like ground breaking news. I
> > seriously doubt they meant to not hand over credit. I'm sure the
> > problem was that nobody told the marketing droids to specifically say
> > most of the Linux changes in the JDK were made by Blackdown.
> >
> > BAPper
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
