Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 92057 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2003 19:53:54 -0000 Received: from exchange.sun.com (192.18.33.10) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 5 Jun 2003 19:53:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 29849 invoked by uid 97); 5 Jun 2003 19:56:13 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-commons-dev@nagoya.betaversion.org Received: (qmail 29842 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2003 19:56:12 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by nagoya.betaversion.org with SMTP; 5 Jun 2003 19:56:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 91806 invoked by uid 500); 5 Jun 2003 19:53:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 91795 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2003 19:53:51 -0000 Received: from smtp-out4.blueyonder.co.uk (195.188.213.7) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 5 Jun 2003 19:53:51 -0000 Received: from localhost ([80.194.24.21]) by smtp-out4.blueyonder.co.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 5 Jun 2003 20:53:55 +0100 Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 20:55:01 +0100 Subject: Re: [math] matters of copyright Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v482) From: robert burrell donkin To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <3EDD3CBF.2090609@steitz.com> Message-Id: <97B2E1F4-978F-11D7-B54C-003065DC754C@blueyonder.co.uk> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.482) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jun 2003 19:53:55.0488 (UTC) FILETIME=[32468200:01C32B9C] X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Wednesday, June 4, 2003, at 01:26 AM, Phil Steitz wrote: > robert burrell donkin wrote: >> the second is that we're going to need to audit our implementations >> against copyrighted ones. (i'm hoping that some better qualified folks >> might volunteer for this.) if we find any that are too similar, then we >> should use apache development resources to create fresh clean room >> implementations. > > I don't understand exactly what you mean here. It might be difficult to > find people with the combined legal and math skills to "audit" the code > for copyright infringement. What did you have in mind here? i'm not sure that legal skills are actually necessary. i have a couple of reasons for this: 1. once we've worked out collectively what we think is right, one of the committers will contact the ASF legal team and ask them to check that what we intend to do will offer sufficient protection to everyone. 2. it's not possible to have absolute protection against litigation on the wide world of the world wide web (are there any lawyers who know the law in every jurisdiction?). usually, acting responsibly and with due care is usually good enough. what i had in mind was people with knowledge of existing algorithms (like Al Chou and David Neuer) keeping an eye on the source and alerting us to anything that seems too similar to existing implementations. IMHO what would be ideal would be for volunteers to check our implementations against the most common copyrighted implementations to make sure they are not strikingly similar. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org