From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>
To: Larry McVoy <lm@work.bitmover.com>, Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>,
David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com>,
Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bitkeeper
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 01:45:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030719234519.GC6942@fs.tum.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030719223956.GG24197@work.bitmover.com>
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 03:39:56PM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 12:28:38AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > product for *money*. If you paid us money, you'd have a point. But
> > > you didn't. You get to use the product for free and until there is
> > > some case law which says otherwise, we get to make any rules we like.
> > > And our rules say you can't reverse engineer. Too bad for you if you
> > > don't like it, I'm not exactly overflowing with sympathy for someone
> > > who paid nothing and is now complaining that they aren't allowed to
> > > reverse engineer and steal what they didn't pay for.
> >
> > The current German copyright law doesn't talk about money. If you allow
> > someone to use a copy the law explicitely states that some kind of
> > contract clauses (e.g. a complete prohibition of disassembling) are
> > simply void.
>
> Alan pointed out to me that the EU rules are for interoperability and they
> do not allow reverse engineering for the purposes of learning how a product
> works.
>
> Since BK can export any and *all* data and metadata from a one line command,
> it's awfully hard to make the argument that you are reverse engineering
> for interoperability. You can get your data as flat files, diffs, unified
> diffs, context diffs. You can get your checkin comments in any format you
> want. It's trivial to get data in and out of BK.
>
> You can even get all of that from a web server so you don't have to sully
> your hands with evil BK software.
>
> So where is the law that says it is OK to reverse engineer when the product
> already provides everything you could possibly want for interoperability?
Current German copyright law says things like that clauses that forbit
to gather information about the ideas behind a program through normal
program usage are void.
IANAL, and we are entering an area where you need a lawyer that reads
both your licensing terms and the copyright law to tell exactly what is
allowed and what isn't allowed.
My main point is:
There are countries that have laws that are different from US laws (yes,
there's a world outside the USA...). If I download software from your
server it is possible that my local law is the one that is valid for the
contract between us (independent of whether I pay for the software or
whether you give it for free) and my local laws might be different from
the jurisdiction in the USA.
> 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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-19 23:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-18 19:51 Bitkeeper Richard Stallman
2003-07-18 20:06 ` Bitkeeper Rik van Riel
2003-07-18 20:22 ` Bitkeeper nick
2003-07-18 20:40 ` Bitkeeper Shawn
2003-07-18 21:28 ` Bitkeeper Alan Cox
2003-07-19 23:45 ` Bitkeeper Pavel Machek
2003-07-20 0:23 ` Bitkeeper Jeff Garzik
2003-07-18 20:32 ` Bitkeeper Shawn
2003-07-18 20:44 ` Bitkeeper Rik van Riel
2003-07-19 18:42 ` Bitkeeper Jan-Benedict Glaw
2003-07-19 18:49 ` Bitkeeper Larry McVoy
2003-07-19 18:57 ` Bitkeeper Jan-Benedict Glaw
2003-07-19 19:05 ` Bitkeeper Larry McVoy
2003-07-19 20:02 ` Bitkeeper Jan-Benedict Glaw
2003-07-18 20:09 ` Bitkeeper Trever L. Adams
2003-07-18 20:44 ` Bitkeeper Shawn
2003-07-18 21:03 ` Bitkeeper Larry McVoy
2003-07-18 21:58 ` Bitkeeper Trever L. Adams
2003-07-18 22:17 ` Bitkeeper Mike Fedyk
2003-07-18 22:39 ` Bitkeeper Alan Cox
2003-07-19 8:20 ` Bitkeeper Eric W. Biederman
2003-07-19 15:34 ` Bitkeeper Mark Mielke
2003-07-18 22:29 ` Bitkeeper Scott Robert Ladd
2003-07-18 20:30 ` Bitkeeper Michael Buesch
2003-07-18 20:36 ` Bitkeeper Shawn
2003-07-18 20:44 ` Bitkeeper Larry McVoy
2003-07-18 21:03 ` Bitkeeper Shawn
2003-07-18 21:08 ` Bitkeeper David Schwartz
2003-07-18 21:28 ` Bitkeeper Shawn
2003-07-18 21:23 ` Bitkeeper Alan Cox
2003-07-18 21:50 ` Bitkeeper David Lang
2003-07-18 21:54 ` Bitkeeper Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-07-18 22:16 ` Bitkeeper Alan Cox
2003-07-18 22:01 ` Bitkeeper Trever L. Adams
2003-07-18 22:27 ` Bitkeeper Larry McVoy
2003-07-19 9:45 ` Bitkeeper Marcus Metzler
2003-07-19 20:42 ` Bitkeeper Adrian Bunk
2003-07-19 21:57 ` Bitkeeper Larry McVoy
2003-07-19 22:28 ` Bitkeeper Adrian Bunk
2003-07-19 22:39 ` Bitkeeper Larry McVoy
2003-07-19 23:45 ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
2003-07-20 0:02 ` Bitkeeper Larry McVoy
2003-07-20 0:10 ` Bitkeeper Tupshin Harper
2003-07-20 0:26 ` Bitkeeper Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-07-20 1:11 ` Bitkeeper Jeff Garzik
2003-07-20 0:23 ` Bitkeeper Jeff Garzik
2003-07-20 0:28 ` Bitkeeper jiho
2003-07-20 0:30 ` Bitkeeper Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-07-20 0:50 ` Bitkeeper Larry McVoy
2003-07-20 0:22 ` Bitkeeper Jeff Garzik
[not found] ` <3F19DA04.80809@c-zone.net>
[not found] ` <20030719235526.GA31428@work.bitmover.com>
2003-07-20 0:21 ` Bitkeeper jiho
2003-07-19 23:57 ` Bitkeeper Pavel Machek
2003-07-18 21:06 ` Bitkeeper Jörn Engel
2003-07-18 22:00 ` Bitkeeper Svein Ove Aas
2003-07-18 22:25 ` BK is not heaven, sure [Was: Re: Bitkeeper] J.A. Magallon
2003-07-18 23:50 ` Bitkeeper James Simmons
2003-07-19 1:05 ` offtopic crap (was Re: Bitkeeper) David S. Miller
2003-07-19 15:00 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-07-20 2:50 ` Bitkeeper Zack Brown
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-07-19 16:00 Bitkeeper John Bradford
2003-07-19 16:17 ` Bitkeeper Mark Mielke
2003-07-19 10:33 Bitkeeper John Bradford
2003-02-15 8:21 BitKeeper John Bradford
2003-02-15 22:26 ` BitKeeper Pavel Machek
2003-02-16 11:40 ` BitKeeper John Bradford
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030719234519.GC6942@fs.tum.de \
--to=bunk@fs.tum.de \
--cc=davids@webmaster.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lm@bitmover.com \
--cc=lm@work.bitmover.com \
--cc=rms@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox