> I think this case is strictly a matter of point of view. Let me ask > you something: are you funded by your company to write those kernel > codes? Or at least those codes are written as a part of official > assignment from your superior? And is there specific agreement between > you and your employer, whether all your work will belong as > intellectual property of your employer, or you stil retain as your > own? Yes. > If most of the answers of the above questions are yes, especially > about the intellectual property (thus, you're forbidden to disclose > them publicly), then the only way to made it as free (as free speech) > is to convince them. Perhaps what you can do is: > > a. Explain that free here refers to free speech, not free beer. So, > other can look at the codes and use them, however your employer could > still retain the intellectual property and still can get money from > the codes by providing supports and consulting services Tried, unfortunately they are not convinced about this.. > b. Especially by marking your codes as GPL, then the derived codes > must also be in the form of GPL-ed codes (if I understand GPL > correctly). Then, it will stay open. Thus, even if your competitor > improve it, you can still see them and use it too. IMO, although in > business sense it sounds kinda silly, but actually it's a fair game, > don't you think? I know what you're saying but I tried this too and they're not going to buy it. But I ask you - doesn't the GPL assert the right to free software - and me making it open is actually not in violation of law? I understand that my work is the intellectual property of my company, but how does me making it openly available put me in any sort of legal risk? Infact I will be in agreement with law by open sourcing my work which was supposed to be open in the first place (derived work) isn't it? Thanks Brian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with "unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxx Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ
