Karen (kol...@decwrl.arpa or {decvax, ihnp4}!decwrl!kolling)
Note that copyright law provides NO protection for the algorithms or ideas
contained in a block of code, but only for the instantiation. Thus, the
fact that RMS looked at any copyrighted code is totally irrelevant; the only
question is whether any of code (possibly modified by some mechanical
translation process like reformatting or identifier substitution) from the
Gosling version and not available from any public domain source was included.
Trade secrets are different, of course, but noone has claimed trade secret
protection for the Gosling code.
Given the legal problems that have come up in this discussion, I am very
leary of purchasing ANY programs from Unipress or James Gosling, for fear of
future legal action based on claims that I have illegally incorporated
code from the packages I bought in other software developed here. Whether
such action would succeed in court is irrelevant since I want to avoid the
hassles. If other sites feel as I do, the whole issue could result in a
substantial loss of business for Unipress.
Anyone know why everyone is so concerned about code written after
inspecting someone else's code?
If software is protected by copyright, I find it hard to believe you could
be sued for writing your own after looking at the code -- but perhaps the
laws are sufficiently complicated that people would rather play it safe.
Perhaps you would have to trust a judge to be able to tell that your new
code was not a simple translation of the old code, and people are afraid
the courts would rule against them.
WRONG WRONG WRONG
Wollongong did not successfully sue Rice. It was settled out-of-court.
Wollongong got more or less what they wanted, but it NEVER went to court.
NOTE: This is not an official opinion of Rice University or Baylor
College of Medicine, but it is fact.
--
Stan uucp:{ihnp4!shell,rice}!neuro1!sob Opinions expressed
Olan ARPA:s...@rice.arpa here are ONLY mine &
Barber CIS:71565,623 BBS:(713)660-9262 noone else's.
("I never thought I'd get involved in this discussion" -- another
other different USENET motto.)
If a software is protected as a trade secret then nobody should
have ever shown it to you or let you access it unless you first
signed an agreement not to reveal the secret. If you see the code
and you haven't signed such an agreement then you can blab and
cause trouble for your company or university because THEY have
broken THEIR promise not to reveal it. IF the owner of the code
can establish that they took reasonable measures to preserve the
secrecy, they can win a suit against YOU and those to whom you
have revealed the secrets.
[I-am-not-a-lawyer-beep.--But-I-read-a-lot-beep.--This-is-a-recording.]
Matt Crawford
OK. OK. I dorfed it up. I still think the whole Phoenix/Eunice mess is bogus.