Re: Last Call: <draft-farrell-ft-03.txt> (A Fast-Track way to RFC with Running Code) to Experimental RFC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 01/14/2013 01:43 AM, Stephan Wenger wrote:
> Inline. S.
> 
> 
> On 1.14.2013 10:33 , "Marc Petit-Huguenin" <petithug@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On 01/14/2013 01:10 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> On Jan 14, 2013, at 10:08, Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug@xxxxxxx>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> I think that you underestimate the IETF community, who certainly
>>>>> know how to see through all the FUD about the GPL.  Sure it may be
>>>>> a bad idea to literally copy 300 lines of GPL code in your code,
>>>>> but that does not apply to what we are talking about, which is
>>>>> reading code.
>>>> 
>>>> I have worked for employers before where reading GPL code was
>>>> considered highly problematic.
> 
> Sure, if the IETF is part of your job, and your employer prevents you to 
> read GPL code (or read Spinoza, or sing under the shower), then do not do
> it for the IETF.  Now if your employer does not regulate what you do on
> your own time, then there is no problem here.
> 
> If someone said to writers to never read any book that is still 
> copyrighted because they might be contaminated and that may somehow induce
> them to plagiarize without knowing it, how do you think they would react?
> 
>> Many would laugh.  Some politicians in Germany, who were recently found 
>> that they plagiarized in the PhD theses, would probably notŠ  Their risk 
>> is low, though.

And?  Plagiarizing is extremely wrong.  But preventing people to read book is
not how any sane person would try to solve the plagiarism problem.

And yet that is what is tried - with some success as I discover - with software.

> 
> There is no difference with software - excepted that there a lot more
> people that would like us to think that software is different.
> 
>> This is incorrect.  If you are found to infringe on someone's copyright
>> in a book you put together, you have a copyright problem (only).  If you
>> are found to infringe on certain open source licenses (including the GPL 
>> variants, but by no means limited to them), and the rightholder forces
>> you to take a license, you also have to provide a patent license under
>> terms you may not like.  Even if you don't take a license, it is quite
>> possible that you have (by copying GPLed code) provided in implied patent
>> license.

Do you have a case to share where that happened with a GPL license?

- -- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Email: marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Blog: http://blog.marc.petit-huguenin.org
Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
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=Wkhd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]