[DECtalk] legality of decTalk
klewellen at shellworld.net
Thu Dec 1 23:13:59 EST 2022
This is a fine point. It's why I personally want to insure they can
make money off their efforts, no questions asked later.
I can, for example, imagine Red Hat might wish to license their success
for Fedora enterprise business products. a solid paper trail lets them
negotiate with Red Hat without anyone worrying that those holding the
code rights might get upset.
On Fri, 2 Dec 2022, Will Prestwich wrote:
> What seems to be lost on many of you is if someone achieves a major milestone in some code that was dormant for years (ie in this case getting it working again on modern systems) there’s a somewhat unspoken etiquette and in my opinion, a degree of common decency, that you should maybe consult the person or people who went to this effort in the first place about what you want to do with the code in its current state henceforth.
> This is especially true if you are intending to make money off of it, which some have alluded to.
> Making the assumption that ‘this code is mine now to do whatever I want now that it has become useful to me’ to anyone with the most basic of social skills can see that this is what we would call a ‘dick move’.
> Inclusive of this, is doing others bidding to previous owners of the code about ownership, particularly only now that it is in a working state.
> To spell it out for you: these conversations and broad assumptions about what to do next has done nothing but upset the people who did the heavy lifting to get it working again in the first place.
>> On 2 Dec 2022, at 1:42 pm, Karen Lewellen <klewellen at shellworld.net> wrote:
>> that is fine, so get that in writing from Roger, that Roger does not care what happens, and everyone can play around as much as they want.
>> On Thu, 1 Dec 2022, Josh Kennedy wrote:
>> [NON-Text Body part not included]
>> Dectalk mailing list
>> Dectalk at bluegrasspals.com
> Dectalk mailing list
> Dectalk at bluegrasspals.com
More information about the Dectalk