Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
PostgreSQL 9.3 beta: Federated databases and more
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 9, 2013
(Nearly) full tickless operation in 3.10
Clarification on a few points
Posted Jan 31, 2012 22:58 UTC (Tue) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)
This is like classic car restoration. If you take a Ford Model T and replace every piece of it, is it still a Model T? or is only inspired by one. At some point the car becomes a kit car with some Model T parts bolted on, and then as those are replaced it becomes just a kit car.
Posted Jan 31, 2012 23:32 UTC (Tue) by RiotingPacifist (guest, #68160)
If you built your kit car while looking at the Model T and never depend on it for either structural integrity or functionality then it would be more complicated. And obviously if you went further still and only took the spec of the Model T and reimplemented it from that then it would be "inspired" and count as clean room reverse engineering.
The real problem is that this isn't a car and the term "derivative work" has real legal meaning and precedent in the world of copyright.
I'm not saying Bruce would have any claim on Toybox purely because Langley has seen Busybox, but I would be careful.
Translations share no lines, but original author has copyright
Posted Feb 1, 2012 11:37 UTC (Wed) by coriordan (guest, #7544)
Whether broad copyright is good or bad for us is another debate, but we have to acknowledge that it is today broader than just exact words.
Posted Jan 31, 2012 23:37 UTC (Tue) by landley (guest, #6789)
I used to refer to it as "SCO disease". For a couple years there, I got paid to help prove it wasn't true. This was shortly before you-know-who tried it.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds