[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde
Subject:    Re: GNOME Desktop Project
From:       weis () stud ! uni-frankfurt ! de
Date:       1997-08-19 1:38:28
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi,

On Mon, 18 Aug 1997, Peter Mattis wrote:

> 
> Alan Cox writes:
> >I do however think that cloning qt is the easier approach Miguel
> 
> The problem with cloning qt is finding people to do it. The source
> code to qt is so easily available that I think you might have trouble
> finding qualified and willing people who haven't been "tainted". For
> instance, I couldn't do it. When I first looked at qt I was interested
> to see how the signal/slot mechanism worked. Easy I just go and look
> through the source. Now what happens when I go to implement a clone. I
> can try and force myself not to remember and borrow anything from the
> qt source I saw, but that doesn't sound very legally solid to me. 
> 
> Of course, I'm not a lawyer. Maybe someone who has a better
> understanding of the law in this area can say whether someone who has
> seen the Qt source can implement a GPL'ed clone.

Peter, the Trolls have no patent on their ideas as far as I know.
That means that you are allowed to write something that uses the
same "IDEA" like the Trolls event mechanism. You are not allowed to
copy their code and you are not allowed to read their code and write
it down a bit changed.

If one says: I deleted the sources on my hard disk and writing
every line from scratch, then this is legal. If they would want to
sue you, they would have to proof, that you copied their code.
It is impossible to get a patent on APIs and abstract algorithms
( at least in germany, I think ).

Bye
Torben

> Peter
> 

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]