Adobe copyrighted/relicensed sources issue

[rete...@gmail.com]

Hello, is there any official legal stand for distributing derivative work libraries of Adobe copyrighted sources, by Haxe under MIT license? 

Here is example class possibly affected by this copyright/relicensing issue.

http://help.adobe.com/en_US/FlashPlatform/reference/actionscript/3/flash/net/Socket.html
http://api.haxe.org/flash/net/Socket.html

I think this need to be clarified or I missed something?

[Benjamin Dubois]

I don't think there any "work libraries of Adobe copyrighted sources" in haxe source code.

It is not a kind of fork of the player (which is closed source anyway)

--
To post to this group haxe...@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/haxelang?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haxe" group.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[rete...@gmail.com]

Adobe is pretty straight about copyright of provided materials from the start.

Most of Haxe sources in flash.* subpackages are near 1-1 with Adobe APIs provided through documentation or playerglobal.swc (abc format).

It is clear to me that these materials are copyrighted if not obtained other way, so distribution of its modified versions is derivative work fragile to relicensing.

As far as I know Adobe never contributed discussed materials under compatibile license (e.g. when contribute to Tamarin or Apache Flex), so I ask about any official stand about relicensing them under MIT.

[Valentin Lemiere]

Haxe doesn't use adobe's source in flash.*, it's all just extern class that will be "replaced" with their real adobe flash counterpart when compiling.

The usage of the api is a bit more vague area, is the api copyrighted? (huge trials on that, google-oracle for instance) but is the fact that's to target the real flash enough to make it an exception?

At least nothing is modified so that's not derivative work, maybe not plagiarism but counterfeit?

Grey area I think.

[Nicolas Cannasse]

Le 14/09/2014 10:07, Valentin Lemiere a écrit :
> Haxe doesn't use adobe's source in flash.*, it's all just extern class
> that will be "replaced" with their real adobe flash counterpart when
> compiling.
>
> The usage of the api is a bit more vague area, is the api copyrighted?
> (huge trials on that, google-oracle for instance) but is the fact that's
> to target the real flash enough to make it an exception?
>
> At least nothing is modified so that's not derivative work, maybe
> not plagiarism but counterfeit?
> Grey area I think.

We don't reproduce the API, we are only using it so even under the US
law we are allowed to do this under the DMCA for interoperability reasons.

Of course in Europe we don't have software patents.

Best,
Nicolas

[j...@justinfront.net]

I don't see that Haxe api are any closer to Adobe ones than other
products such as SwishMax, have you contacted SwishMax for a comment
also, or are you just stirring. Adobe have long encouraged developers
to target the flashplayer as a semi open standard to counter claims that
flash is completely closed source ecosystem.

If you look inside swf's generated by Haxe you will find the Bytecode is
often more optimal and original work, I think your referring to
superficial similarities, largely a consequence of interacting with the
flash player.

On 14/09/2014 08:33, rete...@gmail.com wrote:
> Adobe is pretty straight about copyright of provided materials from the
> start.
>
> Most of Haxe sources in flash.* subpackages are near 1-1 with Adobe APIs
> provided through documentation or playerglobal.swc (abc format).
> It is clear to me that these materials are copyrighted if not obtained
> other way, so distribution of its modified versions is derivative work
> fragile to relicensing.
>
> As far as I know Adobe never contributed discussed materials under
> compatibile license (e.g. when contribute to Tamarin or Apache Flex), so
> I ask about any official stand about relicensing them under MIT.
>
> W dniu niedziela, 14 września 2014 05:48:55 UTC+2 użytkownik Benjamin
> Dubois napisał:
>
> I don't think there any "work libraries of Adobe copyrighted
> sources" in haxe source code.
> It is not a kind of fork of the player (which is closed source anyway)
>

> On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 1:53 AM, <rete...@gmail.com <javascript:>>

> wrote:
>
> Hello, is there any official legal stand for
> distributing derivative work libraries of Adobe copyrighted
> sources, by Haxe under MIT license?
>
> Here is example class possibly affected by this
> copyright/relicensing issue.
> http://help.adobe.com/en_US/FlashPlatform/reference/actionscript/3/flash/net/Socket.html

> <http://help.adobe.com/en_US/FlashPlatform/reference/actionscript/3/flash/net/Socket.html>
> http://api.haxe.org/flash/net/Socket.html

> <http://api.haxe.org/flash/net/Socket.html>
>
> I think this need to be clarified or I missed something?
>
> --

> To post to this group haxe...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>
> http://groups.google.com/group/haxelang?hl=en

> <http://groups.google.com/group/haxelang?hl=en>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> Google Groups "Haxe" group.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout

> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.

[Joshua Granick]

If it were subject to copyright concern (as, in the past, we have used the Adobe documentation more liberally), the Adobe documentation for AS3 is a creative commons "share alike" license, meaning that the free exposure that Adobe gives to it should remain consistent, so re-use for open-source is fair game. The question of re-licensing is important, but the use is minimal enough (only functional, not any written content) that it doesn't even need a mention

[dlots]

Adobe explicitly promotes Starling which is quite similar to it's display list API.

In addition, any action by Adobe would certainly be halted on by the affirmative defense of acquiescence considering Haxe has been around for years. License compatibility or not, licensing is enforced in courts and this affirmative defense would slap this down instantly.