EL lets copy it and make it GPL, and ofcourse it takes him a lot
EL less time cause the planing and desiging is already done.
EL
EL that is prefectly ok thing to do?
Yes, this is perfectly OK thing to do, just as some ancient greek (or
modern american, for that matter) could spend all his life
gk if you'd take away this kind of law, you'll have to find an alternative
gk means for making drugs. would these means be governmental? this goes
Rather, for making pharmaceutical companies to have the same level of
profits without doing any change in their business. Which is not exactly
the
TF Lets see if I understand you correctly. A company created an
TF AIDS cocktail. now, because it was so expensive for them to
TF create, they want a return in the short term, i.e.: 3-5 years.
TF Taking your perspective, would also mean that 1 third from the
TF third world can just stick their
On 16 Jul 2002, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
Oron Peled [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The basic division used to be:
* Academy: does basic research, is funded by public (taxes)
and the results are published and available to the
public.
Also funded by tuition payments,
On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 14:55, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
This does not contradict my point: whether you are employed by a
company or by a university, your employer owns the IP you
produce. According to the article, this is the case since 1980 (when
Bayh-Dole went into effect). The point of
On 17 Jul 2002, Gilad Ben-Yossef [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IANAL but I think this is not true automaticaly but rather, most
contracts have a spcific section that makes this so, but it is not the
default case, just the common one.
Yet another reason why IP is misleading. Patents and copyrights
On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 15:40, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
Gilad Ben-Yossef [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 14:55, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
This does not contradict my point: whether you are employed by a
company or by a university, your employer owns the IP you
produce.
On 17 Jul 2002, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
I actually paid a bunch of lawyers once to understand a particularly
difficult employment contract. It was explained to me at length that
the law (in Israel) recognizes non-competition without any explicit
clauses in the contract.
What the law will
On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, guy keren wrote:
On 17 Jul 2002, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
I actually paid a bunch of lawyers once to understand a particularly
difficult employment contract. It was explained to me at length that
the law (in Israel) recognizes non-competition without any explicit
There was, about that time, a ruling of Check Point vs. RadGuard (or was
that the other way around? Being as it is that I was interviewing for
both companies at the time the ruling was made, I tend not to remember).
I don't recall that case including customer lists, though.
On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Oron Peled wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jul 2002 05:40:29 +0300 (EET DST)
Uri Bruck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Salk developed the vaccine for polio while working for a university. He
worked for a salary. The project was a joint project of several
universities, and obviously had
so you think going to a program which someone spend hours on
planing and designing,
or as people suggested before months of living off saving and working full
time on it.
and then someone comes after all this efford and say cool design/idea
lets copy it and make it GPL, and ofcourse it takes him
if you had any point in this e-mail i failed to see it. sorry.
please explain it again in a simple langauge.
Ely Levy
System group
Hebrew University
Jerusalem Israel
On Mon, 15 Jul 2002, Tzahi Fadida wrote:
So, what you are saying is that the guys who invented the tank, planes, tree
I agree with you that the way software companies abuse laws ,take
redicules prices and abuse monopoly is wrong.
it doesn't make fs right.
and I'm not talking about years of diffrence I'm talking about a week
later.
Ely Levy
System group
Hebrew University
Jerusalem Israel
On Mon, 15 Jul
The point seems to be that ideas are not copyrightable, for a good
reason. Otherwise, copying anything from anyone would be illegal, such
as copying to mechanical form such inventions as the turtoise's shell
and the bird's wings. This is, after all, only reimplementations of
existing ideas.
On Mon, 2002-07-15 at 11:51, Ely Levy wrote:
so you think going to a program which someone spend hours on
planing and designing,
or as people suggested before months of living off saving and working full
time on it.
and then someone comes after all this efford and say cool design/idea
lets
Ideas usually are regarded as worthless while implementation
is everything.
Hence copying the idea is usually accepted while copying the
implementation (the actual source code) is not acceptable.
-- Gabor
=
To unsubscribe, send
Alexander Maryanovsky wrote:
The solution to your problem is of course to release your software
under the GPL in the first place and sell it at reasonable prices.
That or write software that 10th graders can't implement. If you
intended to make money on such software in the first
but taking exactly your example, if AIDS was not a disease affecting
rich people (and , the horror, heterosexual white males at that) there would
have been almost no AIDS research at all (in the academia as well), so that
people would die not only for 5 more years but for 50.
(and don't tell
I don't understand the sense in your answer at all.
I said that balanced capitalism (a symbiotic approach) produces medicines
to everyone faster , and ultimately saves more lives for the develloped
countries as well.
you reply was making an analouge to genocide in order to
produce living space:
On 15 Jul 2002, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
Somehow, somwhere, somwehn the human race (or part thereof) came up with
the weird notions that ideas can be owned. The idea that ideas can be
Someone already pointed out that ideas cannot be copyrighted. There is a
distinction between an idea, and
This one's OT, but since the discussion drifted to AIDS medicine, I'd like
to point out this commentary:
http://www.time.com/time/2001/aidsinafrica/drugs.html
On Mon, 15 Jul 2002, Tzahi Fadida wrote:
obviously you did not notice I replied someone. I know the difference between a drug
and a
On Mon, 2002-07-15 at 17:41, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
If Merck or Pfizer or whatever pharmaceutical developing AIDS
cocktails were required to give away the results of their research and
development effort to third world countries for peanuts, they would
not bother to start their research in
On 15 Jul 2002, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
If Jonas Salk and Albert Sabin or whatever pharaceutical developing
Polio vacine were required to give away the result of their reseachand
development effort to third world countries for peanutes, they would not
bother to start their reasearch in the
On 15 Jul 2002, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
Oh wait... they did start their research. They did give it for free not
just to third world countries but to the entire world. They did manage
to stop almost completly a disease that is just as horrible and just as
terrible as AIDS and the only
25 matches
Mail list logo
