Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Dear Mr. Parallax Inc - Letter #2 - Page 2 — Parallax Forums

Dear Mr. Parallax Inc - Letter #2

2»

Comments

  • PropabilityPropability Posts: 142
    edited 2011-02-01 10:29
    I hope that all the others that have put their effort and thinking into this copyrightable piece will be included if they so desire.
  • idbruceidbruce Posts: 6,197
    edited 2011-02-01 10:35
    Propability

    :)

    I am not out to sue anyone either. I personally would simply love it if a bunch of people joined the effort to make this a real nice object. It would be nice to have the copyright notice below:
    Copyright(C) 2011. Parallax, Inc. All Propeller Forum Members
    Bruce
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-02-01 10:48
    Excellent idea Bruce, but why not:

    Copyright(C) 2011. All Propeller Parallax, Inc. Forum Members.

    I see no reason why not. Who says you can't assign copyrights to people who never asked for it?
  • BatangBatang Posts: 234
    edited 2011-02-01 10:50
    Pedantic

    –adjective
    1. Ostentatious in one's learning.

    2. Overly concerned with minute details or formalisms.

    I'm leaning towards option 2:)
  • RavenkallenRavenkallen Posts: 1,057
    edited 2011-02-01 10:50
    Bruce, i once had a similar question. If i wanted to use someone Else's code for a commercial product, could i do it without invoking their wrath? Heck, yeah, as long as you put the license agreement in the code. The people that contributed code did it for the good of the community, to make someones life easier. They are not(For the most part), using those objects exclusively for monetary gain. These objects are like building blocks, not like a fully finished application. I have made small contributions to the OBEX and if someone really wanted to rip off my code, would i be mad? Yeah! but i wouldn't sue them over it(And i wouldn't lose any sleep over it either:))... I am not trying to sound mean, but you do ask a lot of questions. We will try to answer them, but you gotta be gracious with us, we can only work so fast:)
  • idbruceidbruce Posts: 6,197
    edited 2011-02-01 10:54
    Heater

    There may be some section of Title 17 of the U.S.C. that may tell you that it is illegal. I am unaware of any such section, but it does not mean it doesn't exist. Ownership is transferable, but the Copyright symbol remains unaltered.

    Bruce
  • PliersPliers Posts: 280
    edited 2011-02-01 11:00
    I spend as much time as I can in these forums reading, some of the discussions are incredibly informational. I don’t normally add to the discussion because I don’t have anything intelligent to add. Plus my grammar and spelling are the worse. Also I'm kinda thin skinned.
    Some of the discussions are quite funny; still I don’t contribute because my humor could be misread.

    This discussion made me laugh out loud.

    I apologize for not really contributing anything intelligent to this discussion.
  • idbruceidbruce Posts: 6,197
    edited 2011-02-01 11:00
    Ravenkallen

    Of course I ask a lot of questions. I only ask because I want to know the answer. I may appear to be a "know it all", but the fact is, I am quite ignorant just like everyone else on the planet. We all have our areas of expertise.

    I ask questions to learn the answers that are unknown to me. If I know the answer, I never ask a question.

    Bruce
  • RonPRonP Posts: 384
    edited 2011-02-01 11:10
    Hello All,

    Bruce I am not trying to hijack your thread. :cool: Since everyone is on the subject I have another question. What about Objects in the Exchange that don't include the MIT license should we just use them at will or try and contact the Author? The OBEX says "All objects on the Propeller Object Exchange are provided under the MIT License. By downloading and/or submitting objects, you are agreeing to this license." Is that statement good enough?

    -Ron
  • idbruceidbruce Posts: 6,197
    edited 2011-02-01 11:11
    Pliers

    You may find it humerous, but it is actually a very serious subject. I certainly would not want to be on the losing end of a copyright infringement case. As I said earlier:
    But I have also learned that approaching things with a carefree attitude can come back and bite you.

    For instance, in this circumstance, I have provided the attached object as is for other people to use. Being a nice guy and all, a person could reasonably assume that I am that way with all my proprietary materials. However, this is far from the truth. If someone were to hijack my patent, I would sue the living daylights out of them.

    Bruce
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-02-01 11:15
    Whilst we are here, what is all this "MIT" licence thing about anyway?

    All over the place we see files containing statements like:
    Copyright (c) 2011 by Fred Blogs
    TERMS OF USE: MIT License

    Well what and or who is this "MIT" thing?. Now it may well be referring to the "Massachusetts Institute of Technology" but that is not stated anywhere. And by the way, what has that MIT got to do with Fred Blogs' (or my) code? For sure, more often than not, nothing.

    OK so it seems the "MIT" part is somehow just a name for that set of licensing terms, as first written by, well, MIT. The statement that normally follows the copyright notice as shown above.

    Fine but, as a potential user, copier, distributor of that file I cannot just see "MIT" and be sure I'm in the clear. I should really read the attached licensing terms and be sure they are what I think they are.

    Conclusion, this whole "MIT" thing does not make any sense. Might as well call it the "Dogs Breakfast License".
  • BatangBatang Posts: 234
    edited 2011-02-01 11:19
    Write original code, end of problem.
  • idbruceidbruce Posts: 6,197
    edited 2011-02-01 11:23
    RonP
    What about Objects in the Exchange that don't include the MIT license should we just use them at will or try and contact the Author? The OBEX says "All objects on the Propeller Object Exchange are provided under the MIT License. By downloading and/or submitting objects, you are agreeing to this license."

    By using an object within the OBEX that does not have an MIT license, you are taking a gamble. Even with the MIT license, the copyright owner could still initiate proceedings even though it would be frivilous. However, in the case where no MIT license is attached, it would be up to a judge or jury to determine the validity of:
    By downloading and/or submitting objects, you are agreeing to this license

    Did the person knowingly agree to these terms?

    Did he actually read these terms? ETC....

    Bruce
This discussion has been closed.