Re: Software as intellectual property -- It's all about the license

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by thingy, Dec 21, 2009.

  1. thingy

    thingy Guest

    On Dec 21, 3:04 am, "impossible" <> wrote:
    > Larry D'Loserites contrast "open-source software" to "proprietary
    > software" -- as if the two were different species. But nothing could be
    > further from the truth.


    Truth in your case is stretchy it seems....

    > Open source software released under the GPL is proprietary software, meaning


    no it is copyrighted software.

    > that developers have certain exclusive property rights that give them
    > control over how that software is used, copied, distributed, or modified.


    As per copyright law.

    > The same is true of software released under a convential End User License
    > Agreement. In both cases, these rights originatre from copyright protection.


    Yes but EULA often is far more restrictive and seeks to extend
    copyright law, usually way past the bounds of reason.

    > Confusion


    There are alsways stupid people who seek to take unfair advantage.

    > over this issue is now hurting open-source developers, who have
    > increasingly found themselves resorting to lawsuits to prevent infringement
    > by companies that thought "open source" meant they could save money by
    > ignoring compliance issues.


    See above.

    > "Open source licenses are granted by the copyright holder and the license is
    > an exercise of the copyright. In order to enjoy the benefits of the license,
    > you must comply with its terms. If you don't comply with the license, you're
    > not licensed--and another word for unlicensed use is 'infringement' ....


    Correct...

    > "The main issue for businesses is internal control. Businesses have
    > procurement organizations that are responsible for procuring everything the
    > business uses in its operations. Those organizations review agreements and
    > establish terms before they write the check. The internal control is based
    > on the assumption that the business will pay for everything it uses. In
    > order to arrange for payment, you have to go through procurement.


    If you "write" it in house there is no procurement process.

    > "Because open source is made available without charge, this basic internal
    > control fails. The software often comes into the organization without review
    > of the associated obligations or any process to ensure compliance. Companies
    > are in the process of implementing policies and processes that impose basic
    > internal controls over acquisition, use, and compliance of open source
    > software"


    Which is reasonable, but mis-directed within the context you are
    trying to claim (which does not exist) ie You can take GPL software
    and use it, and modify it within your company and there is no
    compliance issue...Most companies who use the OSS dont have any
    concerns or issues or liabilities, unlike users of "true" commercial
    software.

    ie in the USA (and others?) the financial penalties are actually very
    severe for using un-licenced commercial software, punitive in fact
    (and in some ways not un-reasonable IMHO).

    >There is only a compliance issue when you seek to distribute it and sell it at which point if the GPL code is statically inside your software you are >in breech...


    Its really quite simple, its lazy or dis-honest programmers/managers
    or (software writing) business owners who are trying to have a free
    ride...

    > http://www.informationweek.com/news/development/tools/showArticle.jht...


    You should get a job as a PR consulatant or something else (equally
    useless...) you have a talent for lies, half truths and mis-direction
    that would see you well.

    regards

    Thing
     
    thingy, Dec 21, 2009
    #1
    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. TechNews

    Rant: Intellectual Property, DRM, and Microsoft

    TechNews, Jun 2, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    556
    ProfGene
    Jun 3, 2004
  2. peterwn

    Morality and Intellectual Property

    peterwn, Jul 30, 2007, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    405
    thingy
    Jul 31, 2007
  3. Rob Slade, doting grandpa of Ryan and Trevor

    REVIEW: "Intellectual Property and Open Source", Van Lindberg

    Rob Slade, doting grandpa of Ryan and Trevor, Jan 5, 2009, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    622
    Rob Slade, doting grandpa of Ryan and Trevor
    Jan 5, 2009
  4. impossible

    Theft of intellectual property isn't a crime?

    impossible, Nov 7, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    96
    Views:
    2,038
    Carnations
    Nov 23, 2009
  5. Carnations
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    422
    thingy
    Dec 21, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page