Dazed_75 wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Ryan Rix <phrkonaleash@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Dazed_75 wrote:
>>> Makes me wonder if anyone has seriously looked into that (again as a
>>> purely defensive measure).
>>>
>> How can we? Without access to their source code, they have a huge upper
>> hand on Free software in this respect. We are 'guilty' of patent
>> infringment and copyright law violations if we even attempt to reverse
>> or determine how their systems work.
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>> Because software patents (which should not exist) are not about source code
> as copyrights are.  NTL, I was not implying that "we" might have done so as
> much as wondering if anyone had.  I believe m$ has been guilty of both (like
> everyone else per the argument) but like you say the only way anyone gets to
> see their code is not usable to prove they are/were in violation.
> 

It's like the old catch22 laws designed to catch people in possesion of 
marijuana.
"Marijuana is legal as long as you come and buy this license to use it. 
You'll have to show up with the marijuana you want licensed. But, ohbtw, 
if you show up with unlicensed marijuana we're arresting you."
"Oh, the only way to prove we are infringing on patents and copyright is 
to look at our source, but if you look at our source you are infringing 
on our patents and copyright."

---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss