5 ms·
you don't have to use the code, you can (and probably want to) implement the code yourself.
by fijal 11y ago
you don't have to use the code, you can (and probably want to) implement the code yourself.
- rhaps0dy 11y agoWhy do you really want to duplicate work and write, test, debug, maintain... a FLIF decoder yourself? Also, I'm not sure how far do you have to deviate from the original code to not be covered by its license.
- bostonpete 11y agoTechnically, I believe the answer is 100%. If you're using the original code as a starting point or a reference for your code, then you're basically creating a derivative work.
- logfromblammo 11y agoCorrect, you have to do a clean room implementation. You either start from a public standard, or you need two separate teams. One team is allowed to look at the existing code and make a detailed description of what it does, but not write any new code, and the other team can read the descriptions from the first team and write the new code, but they can't ever look at the old code. This only works to avoid copyright infringement. Patent infringement cannot be avoided in this fashion.
- digi_owl 11y agoAnd that, boys and girls, is how we got the PC clones. Thanks to Compaq no less. Could not happen today though, as back then IBM could not patent the BIOS chip.
- pbhjpbhj 11y agoYou can copy how something works, copyright doesn't protect that, patents protect that. If the form of it is necessary for how the thing works then it's not an artistic expression and so you can copy that directly. Generally speaking there are not interoperability exclusions though so if the choice isn't technically essential you can't copy.
- adekok 11y ago> Why do you really want to duplicate work and write, test, debug, maintain... a FLIF decoder yourself? Because multiple implementations are useful.