Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 07:45:32 -0500 (EST)
From: linux-os <linux-os@analogic.com>
Reply-To: linux-os@analogic.com
To: kernel <kernel@crazytrain.com>
cc: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>, Matthew Jacob <lydianconcepts@gmail.com>,
       Jeff Sipek <jeffpc@optonline.net>,
       Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BK] upgrade will be needed
In-Reply-To: <1108469967.3862.21.camel@crazytrain>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0502150732110.9562@chaos.analogic.com>
References: <20050214020802.GA3047@bitmover.com>  <58cb370e05021404081e53f458@mail.gmail.com>
  <20050214150820.GA21961@optonline.net> <20050214154015.GA8075@bitmover.com>
  <7579f7fb0502141017f5738d1@mail.gmail.com>  <20050214185624.GA16029@bitmover.com>
 <1108469967.3862.21.camel@crazytrain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2399
Lines: 64

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, kernel wrote:

> On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 13:56, Larry McVoy wrote:
>
>> All we are trying to do is
>>
>>     1.  Provide the open source community with a useful tool.
>>     2.  Prevent that from turning into the open source community
>>         creating a clone of our tool.
>>
>
> lol
>
>
>
>> I agree that this sucks, having a license that restricts your creativity
>> is very annoying.  On the other hand, you don't have to agree to it.
>
>
> Just catching up on this thread.  I guess I'm ultimately surprised that
> the developers here don't create a system *they* like with *their*
> knowledge and skillsets.
>
> With all of the complaining about BK you'd think there'd be an equal
> alternative.
>
> For everyone not liking Larry nor BK, why don't you use that as
> inspiration to develop together a better app with terms more agreeable?
> Surely that would put a bit of vinegar in his p*ss, wouldn't it?
>
> -fd

I have two questions for Larry.

(1) If I use BK for company source-code development (purchased
product, I didn't buy it, the company did and they require
me to use it for my work) and I go to work for another company
that also uses BK, your license says I can't use BK at the other
company, which means that I can't work there.

This is unlawful. How do you intend to enforce this?

(2) If I use BK and I decide that I don't want to do business with
you or the courts say that I have to return the software, will my
source-code still be usable with, perhaps CVS? In other words
do I need BK to retrieve my company's intellectual property?

Note that there is a little company (was a big company until
the lawsuit), that used VOBS (container files) to store source-
code. Seems that when the license expired, the users couldn't get
their source code out. There was a lawsuit. Company lost
(of course). Seems you can't hold somebody's intellectual
property for ransom, at least in the United States.

Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.6.10 on an i686 machine (5537.79 BogoMips).
  Notice : All mail here is now cached for review by Dictator Bush.
                  98.36% of all statistics are fiction.
-
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/