19 Feb
2004
19 Feb
'04
3:19 p.m.
For the US :
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/qs/ope/fee2004jan01.htm
Best,
dp
iriXx wrote:
yeah, actually Jan, you're right. i dont see the
need for such a
clause either, because the law will cover you regardless of whether
you use the GPL or a regular copyright. the GPL was very cleverly
built on top of copyright law and is legally binding - i believe the
MySQL case tested it in court too.
patents are a different matter, i'm not sure we can preclude the
possibility that people might patent something, except that you'd have
to be on the lookout for a member with $25000 to spare. i believe
thats what it costs to register a patent?....
hth
m~
Jan Depner wrote:
I agree that many organizations
can't/won't sign up to that
restriction. I would think that we're probably only talking about
copyright infringement (including GPL issues), and patent
infringement. Copyright infringement shouldn't be an issue for a
company using
proprietary code since we won't be seeing it anyway so we won't be
copying it. GPLed code could be used by a company that doesn't disclose
the source but, again, how would we know? The only real problem I can
see arising would be submarine patents. Those of us developing Open
Source code probably won't be filing patents ;-) Are these the only
issues or am I missing something?
Jan
On Wed, 2004-02-18 at 10:36, jaromil wrote:
_______________________________________________
Consortium mailing list
Consortium(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.agnula.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/consortium
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 05:23:41PM +0100, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
_______________________________________________
Consortium mailing list
Consortium(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.agnula.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/consortium
> "Members of the Linuxaudio.org
consortium agree not to sue other
> members, or otherwise instigate prosecutions of members, following a
> dispute over reverse engineering."
>
Two comments as input for your discussion:
1. Currently nothing prevents a member to leave the consortium to be
able sue a (former) member. If a significant amount of money is
involved this could happen. In practice this clause therefore does not
seem to have a binding effect.
2. It is very unlikely that any company lawyer (that is: big
companies) would agree to such a condition.
yes ok, but if we cannot even agree to not sue each other, why to be
part of a consortium anyway? :))
- -- jaromil, dyne.org rasta coder, http://rastasoft.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://gnupg.org
iD8DBQFAM5R/WLCC1ltubZcRAlV7AKCwdq8NyMAy3s05Z8w8PRZOQjC1NACgy+5C
IfCS7JppVloq3OT4IOHQXn8=
=DqKX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Consortium mailing list
Consortium(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.agnula.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/consortium