Re: Misunderstanding of PD and copyrights

From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <jhall_at_sims_dot_berkeley_dot_edu>
Date: Thu May 13 2004 - 21:24:36 CDT

> Does it make sense for voting software for there to be many coders?

I could imagine that a bug might be found by a county-hired software
engineer and that it would be a good idea for that engineer to be able
to publish and distribute a patch and or a patched software package.

> And do we want to preclude incorporation of UC written software in
> commercial products?

This gets a little hairy... UC is mostly concerned with liability in
this area... for example:

"[...] Software is a different matter. Software is a product and it is
expected to perform a particular function and there are expected
performance standards. Should such a product fail or cause damage to
someone's computer or records, they could sue the University, and the
authors, unless the University takes appropriate legal steps to
minimize its liability."

This is from: <>

This is why they've developed, at a minimum the following (which
will look a lot like the BSD license):

For UC:

For Berkeley:

> Are there alternative restrictions to GPL?

I'm not sure what this is asking...

> Suppose we said that derivative works had to be published, but could
> be proprietary, would that serve our purposes?

These are all big issues... one thing we need to remember is that if
the software is licensed under a license that is incompatible with the
GPL, you will not be able to use or incorporate other GPL'd software
(glibc, etc.).
= 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 23:17:41 2004

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