Forum OpenACS Q&A: dilemma solved, everyone wins

Collapse
Posted by Torben Brosten on
Ben, you're right to clarify. Patents and code licenses are very different.  I initially used "patent" loosely to imply protection of intellectual property, which includes licenses (regardless of patent, copyright, research data etc.)

I agree that "The license doesn't matter one iota," for the reasons you state; Also, the relationship (between OpenACS and aD) is hopefully "more positive" than any legal paper.

wonderings of an old player...

Now is the time to verbalize my own curiosity about the loyalty of aD to stand by its GPL code in the context of OpenACS, and in the light of any patent infringement challenges that "might" result from "big money" trying to undermine the project. Would aD (and oACS) attempt to protect its authorship of the GPL software? I would hope so.

By looking at the actions by aD over the last year (changes in content of their website), I can't help but feel a little cautious; It seems like aD is jettisoning the whole idealized concept of GPL and ethical use of intellectual resources in pursuit of funds.  [Is money worth that much?]  I feel that the oACS gatekeepers might have the "boiled lobster syndrome", where the changes are happening so gradually that the lobster (ie oACS) doesn't realize it is being cooked until too late (the GPL/oACS is no longer supported by aD --even as authors of the GPL software). It's natural to be concerned because the gatekeepers [your] involvement in development (and the perception of internet-time moving at a faster rate than world time) may make it difficult to experience the external perception I see. Still, you have a direct relationship with aD and therefore "inside information". So, I trust your judgement on this --"not to worry." We could discuss what happens if aD no longer protects its GPL software as the author, but again, I trust they will protect their resources (on a case by case basis) --let's not go there.

public disclosure of prior art...

By the way, the process has been revealed in the public (not via the web) since about 1992, so I feel protected to a certain extent regarding "prior art."

In conclusion...

You've convinced me: "At the end of the day... you should 'reveal' it when involving others fits within your strategy."

When the gatekeepers get bored (ie after the completion of the port of ACS4.x), I'll post the suggestion --complete with system outline, recommended requirements, methodologies, and standards.  I guess that means I need to learn CVS et al real fast --no bypassing CVS by using my own sandbox!

cheers to GPL and cooperative action (this is the evangelist forum, right?)