Re: Assigning copyright?

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Tue May 11 2004 - 13:01:37 CDT

At 11:10 AM -0400 5/11/04, james_in_denver wrote:
>I think that this is an important reason for OVC to maintain ownership
>and licensing of the software. In this way OVC can avoid the possibility
>of competing with variations of it's own software.

 From OVC's point of view, it's bad to have such competition.
However, if OVC is unable or unwilling to make those kinds of
improvements, is it against the public good for OVC to be in
competition? There are multiple vendors of Linux implementations,
aren't there? Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

> Without this it would
>be trivial for a developer outside OVC to make a small enhancement,
>without OVC approval or validation, and then submit that for
>certification in a location that OVC was already certified in. This
>needlessly increases the number of "vendors" submitting for
>certification and dilutes the OVC "brand". This fragments the "product"
>line and places a burden on the certification authorities to choose one
>OVC product over a slightly different OVC code, but not OVC released,

The certification authorities do not have to choose; they can certify
all of them if they wish. It's the customer (i.e., each county) that
has to choose. And each county can choose among a OVC-approved
vendors and non-OVC-approved vendors.

>Better to keep a slightly tighter grip on the reins.

Better for whom?

Best regards,

Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Mon May 31 23:17:35 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:16 CDT