[asterisk-biz] Selling the source codefor asteriskcallcentersolution

[Tom Lynchfield]

not to break the fun..

whats hte price range ?

0-10,000
10k to 20k
20k to 50k
50k-100k
100k+

;) just so we buzz off..



On 5/24/06, Trixter aka Bret McDanel <trixter at 0xdecafbad.com> wrote:
>
> just to clarify something, although it probably won't ...
>
> Patents, trademarks and copyrights cover different but similar
> things.  Its like 3 circles that only very slightly overlap.
>
> Patents cover (many times anyway) more of the overall process of doing
> something, not the specific implementation.
>
> Copyrights cover the specific implementation.
>
> For example g.729 is covered by a patent (ok, series of various patents)
> which is licensed out by the g.729 consortium.  But a specific g.729implementation may be copyright by someone totally different.
>
> In that case you would have to honor both the copyright law (what the gpl
> is based on) as well as the patent law.  However, there are jurisdictional
> issues that arise because not every country has the same set of laws, and
> with respect to patents more specifically, one issued in country X may not
> be valid in country Y, so Y is free to do what they want under their laws.
>
> Add to that basically bogus patents, which may exist and you are totally
> unaware of and you can have real problems.
>
> The gpl does have a provision about patented code, the intent is to avoid
> situations where someone releases gpl code but then places additional
> restrictions on its use later that are not compatible with the gpl.
>
> This does not outright prevent patented code from being gpled, since that
> patent may not be valid everywhere, and the gpl can have a clause that only
> makes it valid in jurisdictions where its legal (there is a faq entry
> somewhere that discusses this type of arrangement).
>
> This does make it hard to gpl code that uses a patented process, in
> spirit, unless there is a disclaimer on the patented stuff.  But its trivial
> to ship a defective license with a product.  The copyright holder, or
> authorized agents, can't violate the gpl on their own stuff (ie what they
> have unlimited rights to) only with stuff they don't have rights to.  There
> is also a gpl faq entry about that.
>
> I believe this is one ason the fsf wants you to assign copyright to them,
> and not keep it yourself, that would prevent you from being able to do
> anything with your code you wanted, instead it would be only what they
> wanted.
>
> If I own both patent and copyright to my code, no one could really do
> anything legally to me if I gpled that code.  At most, if a law existed on
> defective products they could have a claim there since the product can't be
> used under the gpl license I choose.
>
> Further the gpl only matters if DISTRIBUTION happens.  For example
> commercial modules could be written for asterisk, so long as they don't use
> asterisk gpl code, link to asterisk gpl code and are not distributed with
> asterisk gpl code.  The fsf was clear on this issue with asterisk
> specifically.
>
> This probably just muddies the waters rather than anything else, but ...
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
>
> asterisk-biz mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-biz/attachments/20060525/283569aa/attachment.htm