From macrakis at alum.mit.edu  Sun Apr 26 18:33:43 2009
From: macrakis at alum.mit.edu (Stavros Macrakis)
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:33:43 -0400
Subject: [Rd] Closed-source non-free ParallelR ?
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.090426122423.Ted.Harding@manchester.ac.uk>
References: <8b356f880904240953l30d173c6jaf80df45809b2ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<XFMail.090426122423.Ted.Harding@manchester.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <8b356f880904260933p4cb169b9k495608c8b772f977@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 7:24 AM, Ted Harding
<Ted.Harding at manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
> On 24-Apr-09 16:53:04, Stavros Macrakis wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Ted Harding
>> <Ted.Harding at manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>> [...]
>>> ...inspires someone to incorporate the same language extension
>>> into a GPL'd FORTRAN interpreter/compiler. I think I could then
>>> be vulnerable, or they could, on the grounds that I/they had pinched
>>> the idea from the commercial product.
>>
>> Unless you have a confidentiality agreement of some kind, or the idea
>> is covered by a patent, you can pinch any ideas you like from other
>> products. ?Copyright law does not cover ideas.
>
> Well, I'm not so sure about that ... back in 2002/2003, National
> Instrument sued the MathWorks (MatLab proprietors) on the grounds
> that the MathWorks Simulink graphical development tool infringed
> on National Instruments' patented rights in such an idea....

That was a patent case.  We were discussing copyright licenses. Please
read up on the difference before speculating.

            -s



[Rd] Closed-source non-free ParallelR ?
Stavros Macrakis