Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263036AbVAFV6q (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Jan 2005 16:58:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263055AbVAFV6p (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Jan 2005 16:58:45 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:60562 "EHLO main.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263036AbVAFV4J (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Jan 2005 16:56:09 -0500 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: =?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?= Subject: Re: OT Re: Cherokee Nation Posts Open Source Legisation Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 22:55:45 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20050106180414.GA11597@mail.gadugi.org> <200501061836.j06IakHo030551@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <20050106183725.GA12028@mail.gadugi.org> <200501061935.j06JZMq4013855@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <1105043496.970.49.camel@fury> <20050106213221.GA12866@mail.gadugi.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 76.80-203-227.nextgentel.com User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) XEmacs/21.4 (Security Through Obscurity, linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:Z3OwDb7x6gqLKNeleKLFAsIIfUU= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1548 Lines: 34 root writes: >> > proper means by, the public; and >> Seems word-for-word the same. And I would think that an Free or Open >> source licensed work that is published would be "generally known to" and >> "readily ascertainable". >> > >> > You'll have a hard time convincing a jury not on the reservation >> > that publishing something as open source is at all a "reasonable >> > measure to keep it secret". >> > > > If the license says the receipient of a piece of code must acknowledge > and protect the trade secrets it contains, then it's enforceable. If the code is available from a public http server, that doesn't make any sense at all. > We trump state courts on the grounds of sovereinty, so a state court > isn't able to reverse one of our courts unless there's a question of > Federal Law. > > The Federal Courts can in vary narrow areas reverese our courts, but > since this license represents a consentual commerical transaction > with an Indian Nation, most folks will have to appeal to the US > supreme court to get this reversed -- the Federal Courts are bound > by the constitutional provisions regarding sovereignty. Makes Open What about the rest of the world? I'm sure nobody in Europe is bound in any way by US laws. -- M?ns Rullg?rd mru@inprovide.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/