Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Closed Source software companies should be forced to open their codebase for public scrutiny. | 360 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Closed Source software companies should be forced to open their codebase for public scrutiny.

Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 06:48 AM EDT

<< Kind of contrary to presumption of innocence among other
things... >>

When you receive a patent its a state grant of a monopoly
for 20 years. Since when does someone get something for
nothing? It would be fair to ask for disclosure in return.

For copyrights it gets even worse, the copyright extends
protection for the life of the author plus an additional 70
years. So at least the Author should have to fully disclose
his work in return for that.

In a situation where a virtual monopoly is applying for
patent protect or copyright, the notion of presumption of
innocence begins to look quite naive against the background
of the huge sums of money that are in play for the
stakeholders.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Closed Source software companies should be forced to open their codebase for public scrutiny. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 06:54 AM EDT
- Oracle says you can violate copyright by reading the Spec. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 07:38 AM EDT
  - Oracle says you can violate copyright by reading the Spec. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 08:01 AM EDT
  - Not quite - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 08:47 AM EDT
    - I don't think that is accurate. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 10:07 AM EDT
      - I don't think that is accurate. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 11:31 PM EDT
    - and BTW you cannot copy a concept - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 10:18 AM EDT
      - and BTW you cannot copy a concept - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 11:24 PM EDT
- Closed Source software companies should be forced to open their codebase for public scrutiny. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 09:53 AM EDT
  - Closed Source software companies should be forced to open their codebase for public scrutiny. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 10:10 AM EDT
- Closed Source software companies should be forced to open their codebase for public scrutiny. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 10:03 AM EDT

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )