Re: Bitkeeper

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>]

On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 03:27:02PM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 02:08:32PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> > 	My understanding of the relevant case law in the United States is that
> > these types of restrictions are not allowed under copyright law itself.
> 
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 10:23:30PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Actually your license is simply irrelevant in most of thre world. You
> > aren't allowed to forbid reverse engineering for interoperability.
> 
>     "Judge, I want to violate this license on this product that I got
>     for free because it's not free enough".
> 
>     "Judge, we give it out for free and we also developed technology
>     to transfer the data out of our product and into a GPLed product,
>     we do that at our expense and even host the competing GPLed repos
>     for free and they still want to violate the license"
> 
> Who do you think is going to win that one?
>...

"Judge, our current German copyright law explicitely states that such a
 clause is void."


> Larry McVoy              lm at bitmover.com          http://www.bitmover.com/lm

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed