Good write-up by PJ.
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| dinotrac Jan 23, 2011 9:15 PM EDT |
Copyright law really isn't all that mysterious. You are not allowed to copy or distribute protectable content without the permission of the copyright holder except for a deliniated group of exceptions know collectively as fair use. The problems with FM's contentions come in 2 places, if one assumes that the copied code really is there: 1. Protectable -- Not all code is protectable. Stuff that has been placed in the public domain remains there forever and thus can never be protectable. Stuff that does not incorporate a requisite element of creativity -- ie, not dictated by the requirements of hardware, standard, etc -- is not protectable. etc. 2. Copied or distributed without the permission of the copyright holder. You can put "PROPRIETARY" and "CONFIDENTIAL" on every line of code you write, but that doesn't make it so. If you've been given permission to use it, you've been given permission. A license is a formalized form of permission. |
| KernelShepard Jan 23, 2011 10:41 PM EDT |
I haven't yet read Groklaw's take on it, but the second post on ZDNet (which I linked in the Engadget thread) convinced me that it is very probable that there is no infringement. The first response on ZDNet, however, was unconvincing (saying "but they're unit tests" doesn't disqualify them from being copyrightable, however, the second article clears things up further by noting that Oracle's original license permitted their use as unit tests). |
| dinotrac Jan 23, 2011 11:58 PM EDT |
@KS - Yup, it would seem that way. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!