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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: High performance liquid screenshots
From:       Andreas Pour <pour () mieterra ! com>
Date:       2001-06-10 21:29:59
[Download RAW message or body]

Uwe Thiem wrote:
> 
> >From my point of view, this whole discussion about legal issues with
> Daniel's newest style is pointless for various reasons.
> 
> 1.
> Daniel, you did copyright the style to yourself, didn't you? So the
> only person taking a risk is Daniel. If he chooses to do so it's his
> choice! What is KDE? KDE is a worldwide network of volunteers. A network.
> KDE is no legal entity at all. KDE e.V. is not KDE. The KDE League is
> not KDE. In fact, we founded KDE e.V. to have a legal entity handy to
> deal with Trolltech back then. Nobody can send a cease and desist letter
> to KDE because KDE doesn't exist in legal space. They can send it to
> Daniel. Again: If he wants to take the risk, his choice!

Hi,

That's not quite correct.  They can get an injunction against KDE's
servers (I guess this would be Trolltech).  In addition, under certain
circumstances, if infringement is found and the distributors have burned
CDs with them, they may be able to force the distributors to recall all
the CDs and get damages from the distributors.  Causing financial injury
to distributors is not going to help KDE!

> 
> 2.
> But if Apple sends a cease and desist letter anyway? Whom to? Kurt because
> he is the speaker for America? Martin because he is the the speaker for
> Europe? They still aren't KDE!!!!!! Having the most anarchic development
> model in the OSS world isn't a development speed advantage only. It also
> is an advantage when it comes to lega issues. KDE is noting a court can
> get its hands on. :-)

There are servers . . . . and CDs . . . .

> 3.
> What about Linux distributions shipping Daniel's newest style? It's
> their choice. Either they are willing to take the risk and ship it, or
> they are not. Then they leave it out. Their choice, not ours!

Good point.  However I think it would be worth pointing out that there
may be IP issues with anything that's in the core packages of KDE. 
Somewhere were someone building a package for distribution is very
likely to come across it.

> 
> 4.
> When Apple tried to chew our arses back in 1998 (?) we bogged down.  Back
> then, my stand on it was to bite back. This is even more true right now.
> Some cases aren't solved in courts. They are solved in the open public.
> Appple basing their GUI on BSD and trying to sue an OSS project? I'll go
> for it!

It's better in this case, IMHO, to have an individual developer take
that risk.  Maybe you can put the theme on your server?  Then you can
stand up for your principles all you want to :-).

> 
> There are times to keep a low profile. There are times to stand up and
> speak your voice. This is one.

I think if you think about KDE's best interests it is to avoid causing
legal quagmires for the distributors.  The way I see it, Apple obviously
cares more about protecting what it (rightly or wrongly) sees as its IP
rights than it cares about "public opinion" in the Open Source
community.
 
> Daniel's newest style is awesome. I want it. No need to bog down for
> Apple. Maybe we asre the first. So be it. We are bleeding edge. That means
> sometimes we do bleed. Most times it means we are the edge.

I should qualify this by admitting I don't know what Daniel's style is. 
My points apply to themes which Apple would reasonably consider to
infringe their copyrights, and I am not passing any judgment on whether
a particular theme does or does not satisfy that standard.

Regards,

Dre
 
>> Visit http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<

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