Going OT (was Re: What is the story on patents and SELinux?)

[James Griffin <agriffin@cpcug.org>]

Robert Hartley wrote:
> 
> Can code be freed by the GPL, but still tied up in patent stuff?
> 
> I guess everyone saw this article referenced on slashdot:
> http://lwn.net/Articles/2376/
> 
> (Sorry if I missed previous posts on the subject.)
> 
> While working on Eclipse for an IBM partner, I was warned that anything we
> release into the open source community causes us to relinquish all rights to it,
> so we had to be careful not to let out, even accidently, any code or other
> proprietary information lest we lose all claims over it due to the wording of the
> GPL.
> 
Robert,

It sounds like you were seriously misinformed.  Whoever told you what
you describe above was (and probably still is) incorrect.

First, phrases such as "relinquish all rights" imply the placing of
"intellectual property" into the "Public Domain".  In doing so, the
owner of the intellectual property (the copyright holder) is
surrendering "all claims over it".

Second, the "open source community", to the extent that such a thing
exists and is legally defined, has many different licenses that creators
of intellectual property can use to define their rights with respect to
their property.  For example, BSD and BSD-like, GPL, Apache, and others.

Third, the underpinning for such licenses is the Copyright law which
provides the legal basis for the concept of "ownership" for so-called
"intellectual property" (as contrasted, for example, with real estate
(property)).

Fourth, by failing to include a copyright notice in your work, you may
allow it to slip into the Public Domain. (Check with a competent lawyer
for your jurisdiction.)

When you create a copyrightable work (not everything is copyrightable),
you, as the creator, have certain rights under the law (copyright law). 
The copyright holder (the owner, you - in this paragraph) can make your
work available to others for their use subject to terms and conditions
specified by you in the form of a license.  You get to determine the
terms and conditions; you might even choose to apply an already written
license to your work.  You can even make your work available to
different groups or for different uses under different terms and
conditions.  Note that when you make your work available under license,
you are not transferring ownership.  Your work is still your work and
any unauthorized use is most likely to be unlawful.  One thing you can
do with your work is to transfer ownership (of the copyright) to another
party.

There is much confusion about Open Source Licenses.  Some of this
confusion has been generated by inaccurate characterizations of GPL by
senior executives of Microsoft(R), a convicted abusive monopolist whose
conviction was unanimously upheld on appeal.

I would encourage members of this list to do a little home work of their
own rather than relying on what they hear (or read in newsgroups).

Check out some of the following.  In particular do a search for papers
by Professor Eben Moglen, Columbia University Law School.  If you work
for an organization with its own in-house legal staff, ask to see their
Law Dictionary.

The Open Source Definition
   http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.html
The GNU General Public License [and other GNU license information]
   http://www.fsf.org/licenses/licenses.html
Frequently Asked Questions about the GNU GPL
   http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html
Why the FSF gets copyright assignments from contributors
   http://www.fsf.org/licenses/why-assign.html

Please do not blindly accept what I have written.  Check the facts for
yourself.

Regards,
Jim

> Robert

--
You have received this message because you are subscribed to the selinux list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.