4 ms·

I think you missed a piece of the article: "by a person of another Party". So for example the Japanese government cannot force a US company to release source c

by Xixi 11y ago

I think you missed a piece of the article: "by a person of another Party". So for example the Japanese government cannot force a US company to release source code as a condition to allow its use/import/sell in Japan. But the Japanese government can write/finance as much GPL software as it wants, and can import as much GPL software as it wants. The Japanese government can even mandate all software for its own procurements to be GPL-only. What Japan cannot do is outlaw the sell or use of closed source foreign (by a person of another Party) software on its territory. So say if Ford wants to sell cars in Japan, the Japanese government cannot force them to release the source code for a mandatory code-audit as a condition for import... I really don't think it's a good article. (IANAL, of course)

raquo 11y ago
It seems that this particular article is more about creating equal conditions for domestic vs foreign producers – see "as a condition of import". Japan can still require ALL cars sold in Japan to release their source code. They just can't single out foreign made cars for this. (IANAL)
- Xixi 11y ago
  I would think it is more to prevent the theft of sensible source-code (cg drivers, etc.) that would "magically" end up on the desk of local competitors... Imagine that Google launches a self driving car in Japan, but the Japanese government ask access to its source code... How many hours before Toyota gets it and start "auditing" it?
  - riskable 11y ago
    > How many hours before Toyota gets it and start "auditing" it? Why would that be a problem? Sounds perfectly reasonable to me as long as everyone has the right to audit the code. There's a huge public interest in disclosure of source code for things like self-driving cars. If Toyota, Mitsubishi, and other Japanese companies were given the code but no one else then there would be a problem.
zmmmmm 11y ago
> So say if Ford wants to sell cars in Japan, the Japanese government cannot force them to release the source code for a mandatory code-audit as a condition for import It has a bunch of vague hooey about the clause being limited to "mass market software" which I think is designed to deal with that. Of course, it's pathetically poorly defined (if a car is sold to a "mass market" then it's software is too, right?). To me this clause was pretty much written by Microsoft and of course, the negotiators at the TPP table are far to clueless to understand any of the subtlety involved in software licensing and distribution.

by Xixi 11y ago

raquo 11y ago

It seems that this particular article is more about creating equal conditions for domestic vs foreign producers – see "as a condition of import". Japan can still require ALL cars sold in Japan to release their source code. They just can't single out foreign made cars for this. (IANAL)

Xixi 11y ago
I would think it is more to prevent the theft of sensible source-code (cg drivers, etc.) that would "magically" end up on the desk of local competitors... Imagine that Google launches a self driving car in Japan, but the Japanese government ask access to its source code... How many hours before Toyota gets it and start "auditing" it?
- riskable 11y ago
  > How many hours before Toyota gets it and start "auditing" it? Why would that be a problem? Sounds perfectly reasonable to me as long as everyone has the right to audit the code. There's a huge public interest in disclosure of source code for things like self-driving cars. If Toyota, Mitsubishi, and other Japanese companies were given the code but no one else then there would be a problem.

zmmmmm 11y ago

> So say if Ford wants to sell cars in Japan, the Japanese government cannot force them to release the source code for a mandatory code-audit as a condition for import It has a bunch of vague hooey about the clause being limited to "mass market software" which I think is designed to deal with that. Of course, it's pathetically poorly defined (if a car is sold to a "mass market" then it's software is too, right?). To me this clause was pretty much written by Microsoft and of course, the negotiators at the TPP table are far to clueless to understand any of the subtlety involved in software licensing and distribution.