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

Eric Mercer (mercere@netcom.ca)
Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:09:49 PST

- Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

    At 01:02 PM 1/08/97 PST, Zachary DeAquila wrote:
    >*sigh* Check the MOO-cows archives guys, I think the answers to both
    >questions (who owns the server, who owns the db) are there - I know
    >the 2nd question was hashed out mightily here several years ago...

    There was some discussion under the thread subject "ethics of code usage"
    in mid-November 1993.  Mostly it consisted of things like "well I think all
    programming should be public domain" and "professional programmers need to
    eat, you fool."  More or less.  Unfortunately, all the "hashing out" done
    on the MOO-cows list means nothing as far as firming up the legal
    situation.  Good healthy venting, though, I guess.  :)

    I haven't been able to find more discussion on the subject, but if any one
    else does please let us know!  The issue is also close to my heart, because
    although Diversity University Inc. is a nonprofit charitable operation, we
    want to encourage schools to set up MOOs and for that they will need a MOO
    server.  We can supply a core database, but that itself is highly laden
    with original LambdaCore code.  Although it would be really nasty of Xerox
    to chase colleges and high schools for royalties, the threat of it is not
    nice to consider.  Note, however, that a MOO database can be run by any
    LambdaMOO server 1.8.0-compliant server, so in theory MOO users aren't tied
    to Xerox.  However, my understanding is that the only other server (LPMOO)
    isn't 1.8.0 compliant, and I don't know if it will become so.

    As long as Pavel worked on the server, and if his employment contract
    specified that all programming he did belongs to Xerox (or they get first
    crack at it), the server is tied to Xerox.  We must live with the
    possibility of them suddenly enforcing that ownership.  The question is, if
    MOOs gain enough popularity outside the (poor) academic and hacker
    communities, will Xerox enforce its copyright and ask for licensing fees.
    The answer is yes, because they ARE a commercial firm and they didn't pay
    Pavel's salary for nothing.  However, they might be wise enough to
    encourage MOO popularity by supporting the academic and hacker communities
    with free or very cheap licenses.  We can only hope, because its totally up
    to the Xerox policy-makers (not the lawyers, who are just henchman).  If
    they get nasty, I suspect there would be rapid development of non-LambdaMOO
    servers by the MOO community and they'll end up with nothing.  However,
    common sense is anything but common, eh?

    The LambdaCore copyright situation is far more complex.  I'll let someone
    else describe the legal differences between forms of collective works, and
    just say that unless you can argue successfully in court that all
    contributors to LambdaCore understood that they were contributing to what
    was going to be a public domain work, then any one of them can at least
    insist their code be removed unless they are paid a royalty.  At most, they
    could claim LambdaCore is a joint work and that even a person who
    contributed one line has the legal right to claim royalties and block all
    use of it unless they get paid.  Nasty tangled stuff.  Personally, I'd push
    the "you knew it was a contribution to a public domain work" line, but only
    a court can decide the validity that.  Until it's tested, or the LambdaMOO
    admin. get a release from everyone who contributed, no amount of discussion
    here can resolve that issue.  It's for the courts, if anyone chooses to
    test it.

    Eric (EricM on various MOOs)

    P.S.  Hey Erik!  Who owns YOUR contribution to the LambdaMOO server?
    Sorry, I couldn't resist.  ;)

     ________________________________________________________________
       Eric Mercer <mercere@netcom.ca>  phone and fax (404) 685-0918
       DU Services, Manager             http://www.du.org/duSvcs
       Diversity University, Inc.       http://www.du.org
     ----------------------------------------------------------------
    =  DU is a non-profit company that develops, disseminates, and   =
    =  provides training in educational internet tools, emphasizing  =
    =  interactive, multiuser, virtual reality worlds for schools.   =
     ----------------------------------------------------------------