Re: Misunderstanding of PD and copyrights

From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <jhall_at_sims_dot_berkeley_dot_edu>
Date: Fri May 14 2004 - 12:08:16 CDT

> At 7:24 PM -0700 5/13/04, Joseph Lorenzo Hall wrote:
> > > 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.
>
> It's that kind of patching by Diebold that got them into trouble.
> Any patch requires recertification, and probably is best done in
> batches.

Granted, this would have to be in the development leading up to a
certification round... even then, there has got to be a mechanism for
handling last-minute bugs, right? I recall in the most recent (March)
election, Diebold was granted emergency certification for their
smartcard programming devices... does such an emergency cert. exist
for patches to computer code?

> I guess it's time for me to chat with the UCSC Intellectual Property
> person on this topic.

We might want to have a list of questions for such a chat... A few
things I think we should discuss:

-What is the UC Copyright policy on software? That is, is it mostly
just a policy to avoid liability or are there other dimensions that we
should be aware of?

-If people from many universities (intra- and extra-UC) are
contributing to a project, what steps do we need to take?
==================================================================
= 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 23:17:42 2004

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