[colug-432] Open Source

[Angelo McComis]

I read this article a while back. It does seem that GS overstepped their
bounds, and did a bit of a "cry wolf" - but the timing of NSA leaks,
cybercrime, and all that, and mix in an Eastern European guy uploading
something to Germany, and -- well, people are going to overreact.

The license was not cited, but in my knowledge of OSS, you have different
variations. Some are more flexibble than others in requiring anything you
"make" using the source to be made available again. ​

The gray area becomes the case where you use an Open Source codebase and
then create a derivitave proprietary work based upon it, with no intention
of ever distributing or releasing that code. It's simply for "your own" use
("your own" here refers to GS)... and that's typically OK, except when the
original license forbids such use.  Short answer: we can't really know
without knowing the package/source programs involved and what their
licenses are/were.

-Angelo



On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 9:21 AM, tom <thomas.w.cranston at gmail.com> wrote:

>  On 10/27/2013 06:25 PM, Jeff Frontz wrote:
>
> Depending on who owns the software, something like this may transpire:
> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software_Foundation_v._Cisco_Systems
>
>
> On Oct 27, 2013, at 18:43, tom <thomas.w.cranston at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Let's assume I take open source code after reading it's license and
> agreeing that any changes to it must be released as open source. I then
> modify the code, but then tack my own private license to it. How would I
> be punished for doing so?
>
> Tom
> _______________________________________________
> colug-432 mailing list
> colug-432 at colug.net
> http://lists.colug.net/mailman/listinfo/colug-432
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> colug-432 mailing listcolug-432 at colug.nethttp://lists.colug.net/mailman/listinfo/colug-432
>
>  What prompted this question was the Vanity Fair article about charges
> from Goldman Sachs against Sergey Aleynikov for him stealing open source
> code that Goldman Sachs tacked their own ownership onto.
>
>
> http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2013/09/michael-lewis-goldman-sachs-programmer
>
> The author did not site which license applied.
>
> Maybe an injunction could be applied to Goldman Sachs. Who's the real
> thief here anyway?
>
> Please let me know if the VF link does not work.
>
> Tom
>
> _______________________________________________
> colug-432 mailing list
> colug-432 at colug.net
> http://lists.colug.net/mailman/listinfo/colug-432
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.colug.net/pipermail/colug-432/attachments/20131028/83ad3a96/attachment.html