On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 01:39:16AM +0100, Lewis Jardine wrote:
Don't forget SAMBA - it's a reverse-engineer of one of the key
intellectual properties of one of the richest, and most sue-happy
companies in the entire world. If Microsoft could sue the SAMBA team
(and therefore Debian) over
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wouter Verhelst writes:
This is good, but it's not true anywhere else; so if the reverse
engineering has been done outside the EU, there's a problem.
Reverse-engineering is legal in the USA.
And in Norway.
--
Måns Rullgård
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 01:41:09AM +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 01:20:47AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
May I ask you in which country reverse-engineering for compatibility is
forbidden?
I'm just curious, because it is legal in Poland, but only for
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 10:56:09AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
I'm just curious, because it is legal in Poland, but only for
compatibility reasons, and I guess this situation fits this.
That's because Poland is part of the EU now, where it is legal.
No. It was legal also
On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 11:38:17AM -0400, Dan Weber wrote:
The reason why libfasttrack-gift has never been placed into debian is
because it doesn't even qualify non-free. Debian could be sued for
this, and other reasons due to its reverse engineering.
May I ask you in which country
Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 11:38:17AM -0400, Dan Weber wrote:
The reason why libfasttrack-gift has never been placed into debian is
because it doesn't even qualify non-free. Debian could be sued for
this, and other reasons due to its reverse engineering.
May I
Dan Weber wrote:
Specifically, I recall someone saying that the algorithm used by Sherman
Networks is Copyrighted. Even though the upstream is reverse
engineering it, I don't think its legal to use.
Algorithms can't be copyrighted, only specific implementations of an
algorithm. Algorithms
* Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo:
May I ask you in which country reverse-engineering for compatibility is
forbidden?
Probably in none. But publishing your results is not automatically
allowed, and sometimes, there are safeguards against producing a clone
(which serves as a replacement of the
On May 23, 2004, at 11:38, Dan Weber wrote:
The reason why libfasttrack-gift has never been placed into debian is
because it doesn't even qualify non-free. Debian could be sued for
this, and other reasons due to its reverse engineering.
Debian has plenty of other software in its archives
On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 05:52:46PM +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 11:38:17AM -0400, Dan Weber wrote:
The reason why libfasttrack-gift has never been placed into debian is
because it doesn't even qualify non-free. Debian could be sued for
this, and other
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 01:20:47AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
May I ask you in which country reverse-engineering for compatibility is
forbidden?
I'm just curious, because it is legal in Poland, but only for
compatibility reasons, and I guess this situation fits this.
That's
Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
I think that many programs from OpenSource world are made via reverse
engineering, and there is no problem with including them in Debian.
Consider the most important. Linux kernel. Many drivers are made this
way.
regards
fEnIo
Don't forget SAMBA - it's a
Wouter Verhelst writes:
This is good, but it's not true anywhere else; so if the reverse
engineering has been done outside the EU, there's a problem.
Reverse-engineering is legal in the USA.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
13 matches
Mail list logo
