Re: HTML5: mixed signals

Hehe - well I wasn't entirely sure I had managed to abstract what I think about such things compared to pragmatic reality. I also seem to be suffering a touch of sun stroke - so my 'tilt at windmills' level is slightly higher than normal ;) Warmest Regards, Mark. P.S. The last person to

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

Sorry I didn't mean it was an unfortunate way for you specifically to see things, I also meant generally how things are perceived by those who litigate such matters. You must pay closer attention to what I am thinking. ;-) Bob S > On Jul 28, 2017, at 14:14 , Mark Waddingham via use-livecode

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

Again this is general and not specific. The case Richmond put forward is very much a case of over-reach from my point of view (it is quite possible that there was something in his contract there - probably obscurely worded, or it was the universities lawyers interpretation of statute). I

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

What an unfortunate way of looking at things, because what knowledge do ANY of us have that we developed "on our own"? Any program I write I use knowledge I "developed" from any number of sources. Should they all have a claim on what I do? For this to really work, the knowledge would have to

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

On 2017-07-28 20:40, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode wrote: Ooer . . . and how, pray tell, does one tease out what one learnt in one loaction from what one learnt in another? I appreciate that in the realm of teaching (the example you gave) the area is a little grey. However, in the

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

Ooer . . . and how, pray tell, does one tease out what one learnt in one loaction from what one learnt in another? I was teaching some kiddos 2 weeks agao and showed one of them a stack of mine; and he said, "That's a silly way to do that." and then showed me what he thougth was a better way

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

On 2017-07-28 19:49, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode wrote: It turns out that teachers who make software at home, in their own time, do NOT own the copyright to their work if they are under contract to schools unless this has been explicitly "sorted out" in advance . . . a situation that,

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

On 7/28/17 5:32 pm, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: * It is really important to note that in the UK, and most other countries, if you write code during periods of time you are being paid for by your employer, then the copyright is implicitly owned by the company *and not* you.

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

On 2017-07-28 16:36, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: Oops - I forgot to say 'I am not a laywer but'... At the start of this. I should say that most of this stuff is pretty standard, in general as long as you always use attach a license to your commercial works, and always follow the

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

Oops - I forgot to say 'I am not a laywer but'... At the start of this. I should say that most of this stuff is pretty standard, in general as long as you always use attach a license to your commercial works, and always follow the requirements of the GPL then you don't have to worry about

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

Hermann has the 'the right' of it here. Basically it is important to remember that just because you *might* be able to see source-code it doesn't mean you have the right to copy, use or do anything with it. If there is no license attached to it, or if there is not a clear declaration of a

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

*** The following is how I judge this, not based on any 'official document'. *** Depends a little bit upon what you are doing. The javascript part of the calling web page is always accessible, no matter the license. So, important parts that you have as javascript in the standalone's webpage are

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

No, that means, that you have to release your source code to the public when using the community version, while you don´t have to do it when you have a commercial license. Matthias > Am 28.07.2017 um 15:12 schrieb Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode > : > >

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

Well, that is reasonably obvious . . . Presumably (?) that means that HTML5 things hived-off the Community version of LiveCode are in readable Java-script and may be opened and edited as such, while the version of HTML5 available for $299/year hives-off protected code? Richmond. On 7/28/17

Re: HTML5: mixed signals

Um. Like every other platform for LiveCode, there is an open source Community version of HTML5. Not seeing the problem here? You pay for commercial, closed source. You use Community free and share your code. Regards, Heather > On 28 Jul 2017, at 12:07, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode >