4 ms·

IANAL but it seems like it would set the precedent that you cannot do clean room implementations that are legal. That would, for example, prevent every browser

IANAL but it seems like it would set the precedent that you cannot do clean room implementations that are legal. That would, for example, prevent every browser after Netscape from building javascript into their own browser. It might have prevented Mono from existing. It would have prevented Atom and Sublime from being able to use Textmate syntax files. Are those bad things? I believe they are.

trhway 10y ago
>IANAL but it seems like it would set the precedent that you cannot do clean room implementations that are legal. the practice that interfaces are copyrightable seems to has been in place for quite some time. AMD couldn't make Pentium socket compatible CPU. We have LGPL for the same reason. The miracle of IBM compatible BIOS may be attributed only to accidental benevolence of IBM :) Google is on the receiving end right now, yet the copyright protection of the interfaces plus DMCA is what gave rise to the "platforms", and Google just happens to be a one of the 3 largest ones. Unfortunately one can't have it both ways. Anyway, Stalman's preaching may happen to be just a very concrete practical advise after all :)
- dpark 10y ago
  AMD did make Pentium-socket-compatible CPUs. Also, I would imagine that Socket 5/7 were protected with a patent, not copyright.
  - trhway 10y ago
    i forgot about the Socket 5/7. I was referring to the point of their divergence : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Micro_Devices#K5.2C_K6.2C_Athlon.2C_Duron.2C_and_Sempron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Micro_Devices#K5.2C_K... "The K7 was AMD's seventh-generation x86 processor, making its debut on June 23, 1999, under the brand name Athlon. Unlike previous AMD processors, it could not be used on the same motherboards as Intel's, due to licensing issues surrounding Intel's Slot 1 connector, and instead used a Slot A connector..."
    - dpark 10y ago
      "Licensing issues" does not necessarily mean copyright. I strongly suspect patent here.

trhway 10y ago

>IANAL but it seems like it would set the precedent that you cannot do clean room implementations that are legal. the practice that interfaces are copyrightable seems to has been in place for quite some time. AMD couldn't make Pentium socket compatible CPU. We have LGPL for the same reason. The miracle of IBM compatible BIOS may be attributed only to accidental benevolence of IBM :) Google is on the receiving end right now, yet the copyright protection of the interfaces plus DMCA is what gave rise to the "platforms", and Google just happens to be a one of the 3 largest ones. Unfortunately one can't have it both ways. Anyway, Stalman's preaching may happen to be just a very concrete practical advise after all :)

dpark 10y ago
AMD did make Pentium-socket-compatible CPUs. Also, I would imagine that Socket 5/7 were protected with a patent, not copyright.
- trhway 10y ago
  i forgot about the Socket 5/7. I was referring to the point of their divergence : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Micro_Devices#K5.2C_K6.2C_Athlon.2C_Duron.2C_and_Sempron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Micro_Devices#K5.2C_K... "The K7 was AMD's seventh-generation x86 processor, making its debut on June 23, 1999, under the brand name Athlon. Unlike previous AMD processors, it could not be used on the same motherboards as Intel's, due to licensing issues surrounding Intel's Slot 1 connector, and instead used a Slot A connector..."
  - dpark 10y ago
    "Licensing issues" does not necessarily mean copyright. I strongly suspect patent here.