As I see it 2 and 3 clearly do not allow that. Even more: 3 and 6 claim that FUNCTIONALITY that is in Jive will always be owned by Logitech. FUNCTIONALITY is generally poorly defined and especially not at all defined in the License, but in a strict sense that would mean, if I implement a feature that is similar to one in Jive this would then be owned by Logitech. Since this is not about patents, prior art would not help. This is not acceptable for any own developments based on this. Also, ยง9 declares everything you learn from the code as a trade secret and that clause can really get nasty, especially when dealing with the US. Try to prove you didn't learn something from the code but from another source.... Also, I don't fully understand how something that is being provided openly can be considered a secret. This whole construction will probably not hold, at least in Germany, since you are agreeing to a License you don't know before you agree to it (the License claims that you agree to it if you download Jive, yet if you get it through svn, for example, you have to download it first to get hold of the license. These so called "shrink wrap" licenses generally have a doubtful validity).
-- pippin ------------------------------------------------------------------------ pippin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13777 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41672
_______________________________________________ jive mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/jive
