Rotor license (Was: License compatibility of MS-PL and MS-CL (Was: (RE: Groklaw's OSI item (was: When will CPAL actually be _used_?)))

[Stephen Walli]

I was on the Rotor project but not party to the license creation.
That said, this clause was a deliberate attempt based on the history  
of the day (context being everything) to ensure we did not take a  
load of abuse and accusation that we were "tainting people's  
thinking" with the Rotor source publication.  It is relevant to trade  
secret law (as I possibly mistakenly recall) and not to federal  
copyright law.  It doesn't really "fit" with the rest of the license,  
but was there in support of a different issue.

stephe

On 26-Aug-07, at 8:31 AM, Donovan Hawkins wrote:

> On Sun, 26 Aug 2007, Zac Bowling wrote:
>
> Of course, the license you attached also says:
>
> "You may use any information in intangible form that you remember  
> after
> accessing the Software.  However, this right does not grant you a
> license to any of Microsoft's copyrights or patents for anything you
> might create using such information."
>
> Uh, so I can use what I remember, unless I can't? Gee, thanks...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> -----
> Donovan Hawkins, PhD                 "The study of physics will  
> always be
> Software Engineer                     safer than biology, for while  
> the
> hawkins at cephira.com                   hazards of physics drop off  
> as 1/r^2,
> http://www.cephira.com                biological ones grow  
> exponentially."
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> -----
>

Stephen R. Walli
mailto:  stephen.walli at gmail.com
mobile:  +1 425 785 6102
skype:   stephen.walli
IM:      stephenrwalli at AIM | YIM | Hotmail OR stephen.walli at gmail
blog:    http://stephesblog.blogs.com  (Once More unto the Breach)
podcast: http://stephenrwalli.libsyn.com (Once More unto the Breach  
podcasts)
flickr:  http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephenrwalli