Microsoft's copyright liability

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jan 16, 2007.

  1. Microsoft has been quite keen on the freeloader-friendly current BSD
    licence, because it allows it to take such free code and build it into its
    own closed-source products and sell them for money
    <http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1859439,00.asp>.

    However, a lawyer has come up with an argument
    <http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070114093427179> that the
    current BSD licence may not in fact be so clear in allowing such closing of
    the source. If it doesn't, then the freeloaders are in trouble...
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jan 16, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Phil Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote, On 16/01/07 10.18 p:
    > However, a lawyer has come up with an argument
    > <http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070114093427179> that the
    > current BSD licence may not in fact be so clear in allowing such closing of
    > the source. If it doesn't, then the freeloaders are in trouble...


    The conclusions of that article only apply to Australia, if they apply
    at all. The comments (even the slashdot comments!) tear his argument apart.

    -Phil
     
    Phil, Jan 16, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 22:18:10 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > Microsoft has been quite keen on the freeloader-friendly current BSD
    > licence, because it allows it to take such free code and build it into its
    > own closed-source products and sell them for money
    > <http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1859439,00.asp>.
    >
    > However, a lawyer has come up with an argument
    > <http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070114093427179> that the
    > current BSD licence may not in fact be so clear in allowing such closing of
    > the source. If it doesn't, then the freeloaders are in trouble...


    Don't you think that the University of California wouldn't have jumped
    down hard on Micro$oft if it wasn't in strict compliance with the BSD
    licence?


    --
    Dianthus Mimulus

    Microsoft's business practises exposed in court:
    http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/fullstory/dsprgmnt.html#_Toc447960918
     
    Dianthus Mimulus, Jan 16, 2007
    #3
  4. In message <>, Dianthus Mimulus wrote:

    > On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 22:18:10 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> Microsoft has been quite keen on the freeloader-friendly current BSD
    >> licence, because it allows it to take such free code and build it into
    >> its own closed-source products and sell them for money
    >> <http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1859439,00.asp>.
    >>
    >> However, a lawyer has come up with an argument
    >> <http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070114093427179> that the
    >> current BSD licence may not in fact be so clear in allowing such closing
    >> of the source. If it doesn't, then the freeloaders are in trouble...

    >
    > Don't you think that the University of California wouldn't have jumped
    > down hard on Micro$oft if it wasn't in strict compliance with the BSD
    > licence?


    Why, did the University of California have anything to do with Beowulf?
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jan 17, 2007
    #4
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Blue Guest

    On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 23:31:34 +1300, Dianthus Mimulus wrote:

    > Don't you think that the University of California wouldn't have jumped
    > down hard on Micro$oft if it wasn't in strict compliance with the BSD
    > licence?


    Not a given. Maybe they thought that taking Mirosoft to court was as waste
    of time.
     
    Blue, Jan 18, 2007
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?cmFnaW5nZHJnbmZpcmU=?=

    NO LIABILITY ACCEPTED cert. expired

    =?Utf-8?B?cmFnaW5nZHJnbmZpcmU=?=, Oct 16, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,748
    Gabriel
    Nov 14, 2004
  2. =?Utf-8?B?Umlja2Y=?=

    Software Liability

    =?Utf-8?B?Umlja2Y=?=, Nov 3, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    713
    T-Bone
    Nov 4, 2004
  3. William Graham
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    710
  4. Colin B
    Replies:
    195
    Views:
    3,139
    Colin B
    Jan 19, 2007
  5. Lawrence D¹Oliveiro

    Steam boilers and software liability

    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Dec 16, 2004, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    540
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro
    Dec 19, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page