<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Verdana
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
<br><br>> Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 14:55:16 -0700<br>> Subject: Re: what defines source code in (A)GPL ?<br>> From: ben@reser.org<br>> To: harriers@windowslive.com<br>> CC: andrew.wilson@intel.com; license-discuss@opensource.org<br>> <br>> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Harri Saarikoski<br>> <harriers@windowslive.com> wrote:<br>> > I'm slightly confused. First I seem to be given leeway, that Idea is yours<br>> > while Code is open source.<br>> > I.e. no rival will copy the Idea, only plagiarism allowed is the revised<br>> > code (under one framework).<br>> > Then something is attempted to be taken aback from that true argument by way<br>> > of stating the obvious (already understood),<br>> > i.e. that users of the revised code (the original framework under which the<br>> > innovation was implemented)<br>> > stand to gain every right from the innovation.<br>> <br>> It all depends upon the open source license(s) that you're operating<br>> under. If the license has no patent grant then you can release the<br>> source code under that license while patenting the method it uses and<br>> expect to limit those that use it. In some cases as has already been<br>> pointed out to you it may not be clear if a particular license has a<br>> patent grant or not.<br><br>AGPL http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html is the license of the based work.<br>It seems to grant patenting rights of based works. <br><br>Then again, people here keep saying patenting is not a guarantee.<br>However, consulting some sources here on SW patents says it's in the *way of words*<br>that you compose the patent document that SW can be validly patented.<br><br>I.e. that the SW has 'technical' influence on 'outside world' in terms of superior quality <br>in what it does. Any feat of engineering that does sth better can be patented, <br>should think reasonable thinking applies more than artificial separation of SW from <br>other works.<br><br>> <br>> For the most part the effort to prevent patents from "infecting" open<br>> source software is a relatively recent effort. Many older licenses<br>> make no effort to really speak to the issue. However, I would argue<br>> that doing what you are describing has always been against the open<br>> source spirit.<br>> <br>> If you really want limitations on who can use your software, then open<br>> source licensing is really not what you're looking for.<br><br>Perhaps not, but it's the world I grew on. I believe in it, whole heartedly.<br>I wouldn't be here without OS software.<br><br>I understand open source normally doesn't invite 'rogue elements' of abuse<br>and that it works because of it. Should point out, however, that this innovation<br>is definitely something that MS and IBM are interested in copying (more innovative = more prone to copying), <br>so are my rights to my own work by definition less important than those of MS and IBM<br>(who, whenever they innovate something, think of nothing to share) ?<br><br>Seems, with all due respect, the default expectation regarding OS vs proprietary
issues<br>
is that the owner of the new software is 'up to no good', always seeking to
benefit self only.<br>
What I ultimately want is for no license to tell me what is the correct thing to do, <br>
and * then (and mainly then) to release it out of my own volition as open source *<br>not because I have to but because it is the right thing to do. <br><br>Self-inflicted "no monopoly to me" should imply "no monopoly to no one else either", right?<br>
<br>If I decide to release it as OS, I guess I can only expect (i.e. not be sure) that some kind of fairness is implemented for my eight year
research<br>i.e. that I be not unduly penalised for wanting it to be open source and thus getting maximal exposure for it.<br>This original question remains unanswered: Under AGPL, can the proprietary Oracle copy
from my OS mysql+ distribution<br>
the feature that makes databases work better ? (actual application
domain here is as said not databases, just an example)<br>
<br>In AGPL, I find no section concerning that.<br>best, Harri <br /><hr />Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. <a href='https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969' target='_new'>Sign up now.</a></body>
</html>