[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

# RE: anyone ever gotten xerox to clarify the MOO license before?

- Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 11:33:30 PST
- From:
- Encoding: 58 TEXT

    > For similar reasons, it is highly unlikely that the LambdaMOO wizards
    > will ever step in and attempt to assert any clear position concerning
    > LambdaCore; there's essentially no upside benefit from us doing so and
    > considerable downside risk, given that no court has ever ruled on the
    > copyright status of such an artifact (at least, not that I know of,
    > and I have no incentive to spend money having a lawyer look into it).

    For what it's worth, I myself have no intention of ever asserting any
    intellectual-property rights for myself with regard to my own share of
    LambdaCore.  By lines of code, I figure this share to be something on
    the order of 10-30%, depending on how generous one wants to be.  Given
    any determination that I have any such rights at all --- which will
    almost certainly follow from the determination that anyone *else* has
    such rights --- I'd have no objection in principle to signing them over
    to any person/agency committed to keeping LambdaCore freely available.

    My own take on the matter is that this code has always been public
    domain (in the naive sense of the term) and that it's been clear from
    the beginning to everyone who contributed that it would be so.  (IMHO,
    the Berne Convention was a REALLY STUPID idea, if well-intentioned; it's
    really too bad that the US signed on to it, and we'll be dealing with
    the fallout of that decision for years to come.)  Unfortunately, my
    opinions have no force of law.  On the other hand, if I should happen to
    be called to testify in a civil case arising from the use of LambdaCore,
    and the *intended* status of LambdaCore is deemed to have any bearing on
    the case, you may now have a pretty good idea of what I might say.

    The main point:  If it ever comes to pass that someone gives you grief
    for using LambdaCore, that someone is simply NOT going to be ME.

    As for the other authors, I currently have no reason to believe that, of
    those who made the major identifiable contributions, including both the
    past and present LambdaMOO wizards and several others --- a group of
    about 10-15 people, all told --- that there is anyone who isn't
    similarly inclined.  (Again, this is MY OPINION; I CAN'T ACTUALLY SPEAK
    FOR THEM).

    Unfortunately, even assuming this is actually true and no one has been
    turned to the Dark Side by the Emperor in the intervening years, it
    still only accounts for about 95% of LambdaCore, and it's that last bit
    that's the killer, copyrightwise.  Keep in mind that much of this code
    dates from the period before we had mandatory registration at LambdaMOO,
    so it's quite possible that for some of the (many) remaining authors we
    don't even have a (5-year-out-of-date) email address.

    On the bright side, I consider the possibility of some author of that
    remaining 5% going to the extraordinary expense of suing over his 3
    lines of $foo_utils:bar() to be extremely remote, if not quite as remote
    as the possibility of your computer turning to powder or Xerox deciding
    to attempt to turn a profit on the LambdaMOO server.  The fact that
    we're on very murky legal ground cuts both ways here; yes, it makes it
    very hard to clarify the true legal status of LambdaCore, but anyone
    wanting to make a quick buck via the various forms of legal extortion
    faces similar obstacles.

    Roger Crew
    (== Rog@LambdaMOO/JHM, crew@cs.stanford.edu, rfc@microsoft.com)

- Prev: Re: anyone ever gotten xerox to clarify the MOO license before?
- Next: Re: anyone ever gotten xerox to clarify the MOO license before?
- Index: MOO-cows
- Thread: MOO-cows

Home | Subject Index | Thread Index