4 ms·

Identifying all of the owners of licensed code is a difficult problem all by itself. It's not always clear that third party code is even used in a product as an

Identifying all of the owners of licensed code is a difficult problem all by itself. It's not always clear that third party code is even used in a product as any identification or licensing information is lost at compile-time. Some licensed code is only delivered as pre-compiled libraries so a licensee couldn't even comply with a law requiring all source code submitted for escrow.

PittleyDunkin 2y ago
That's surely a detail for the producer to figure out. Don't sell software if it's not legal to sell!
- rrr_oh_man 2y ago
  Easier said than done with deadlines, managers, and incentives
- giantrobot 2y ago
  That's part of the issue, such software is not illegal to sell compiled binaries by the licensee. It is however illegal for them to redistribute licensed source/headers/documentation. They can't turn over the source because they don't own it, merely license it. Quite a bit of closed source software uses closed source licensed libraries with proscribed terms of redistribution. Untold number of embedded devices use closed source licensed dev kits the licensee has no power to redistribute themselves.
  - PittleyDunkin 2y ago
    > That's part of the issue, such software is not illegal to sell compiled binaries by the licensee. It would be under the proposed law, which is basically the point of the proposed law. Closed software is only closed because the (regulated) market enforces its being closed, even if it's contrary to the interests of everyone but the producer of said software. The point of said regulation would be to give a (regulated) market incentive to provide actually free software. Hardware manufacturers should not rely on software moats to stay afloat! And of course with a "free market", people would be buying bricks in boxes thinking they're buying routers or cameras.

4 ms·

Identifying all of the owners of licensed code is a difficult problem all by itself. It's not always clear that third party code is even used in a product as an

by giantrobot 2y ago

PittleyDunkin 2y ago
That's surely a detail for the producer to figure out. Don't sell software if it's not legal to sell!
- rrr_oh_man 2y ago
  Easier said than done with deadlines, managers, and incentives
- giantrobot 2y ago
  That's part of the issue, such software is not illegal to sell compiled binaries by the licensee. It is however illegal for them to redistribute licensed source/headers/documentation. They can't turn over the source because they don't own it, merely license it. Quite a bit of closed source software uses closed source licensed libraries with proscribed terms of redistribution. Untold number of embedded devices use closed source licensed dev kits the licensee has no power to redistribute themselves.
  - PittleyDunkin 2y ago
    > That's part of the issue, such software is not illegal to sell compiled binaries by the licensee. It would be under the proposed law, which is basically the point of the proposed law. Closed software is only closed because the (regulated) market enforces its being closed, even if it's contrary to the interests of everyone but the producer of said software. The point of said regulation would be to give a (regulated) market incentive to provide actually free software. Hardware manufacturers should not rely on software moats to stay afloat! And of course with a "free market", people would be buying bricks in boxes thinking they're buying routers or cameras.