On Jan 16, 2008 7:18 AM, Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not too much implication, for you, normally: > > 1. If you have a licensed copy of Delphi, you can ignore it: > you are allowed to use this source code. > > (We do not have the right to distribute it, but that is our problem, > which we must solve, and which we are solving) > > 2. If you don't have a licensed copy, you can still use the GPLed version of > CLX which is freely downloadable from Sourceforge: it is the same code as > the Delphi code. It does mean that your application needs to be GPLed. > If you don't distribute them, this is not a problem at all... > > So the only case when you could have problems is when both the following > conditions are true: > a) you don't have a registered Delphi > b) you use FPC/Lazarus to create and distribute closed-source commercial > software. > > In this case, then the remedy is to wait for the next release which has > the clean-room code, and simply recompile your application.
Actually, none of this is necessary if the "questionable code" is part of a library routine which is unused and unlinked by the developer, since the resulting program will not contain the code in question. However, if it's part of the compiler itself and not part of the runtime, that raises another question (this whole issue is getting rather interesting from a legal standpoint). Let's say that Corel has infringed upon Microsoft's copyright by including some code from MS Word in WordPerfect. Clearly, Corel is the infringing party. But what does that mean for a user of WordPerfect? Does that mean an author working on a novel is also violating Microsoft's copyright by using WordPerfect? I think almost everyone would agree that he's not. But what if he *knows* that the version of WordPerfect he's using contains copyright violations? Now it starts to get a little murkier, but I think the answer is still "no". A compiler is not very different conceptually from a word processor. Should the result be any different? Again, I don't think so. If the word processor, when generating a document, injects into it some predefined text supplied with the program as text snippets, and those snippets contain text which is actually copyrighted by someone else, then the author needs to make sure those infringing snippets are not included in the completed work he distributes. The same analogy applies here. > It is also under the assumption that Codegear actually can prove that we > have been infringing on copyright. Here's an interesting question: Is any of the code at issue also in CLX? If so, I would strongly argue that there is no infringement possible since Borland GPLed that code over half a decade ago (it doesn't matter legally that they may have also included it in the closed-licensed VCL -- once it's GPLed, it's GPLed for good). > > Things get more complicated even because Codegear is US based, and most FPC > development happens in Europe and south america: I don't know whether a US > copyright is enforceable here in europe. The short answer is yes, there are treaties that make it so. But here are the most relevant issues I see: 1) Code fragments representing a small fraction of a codebase would rarely be sufficient enough to establish that a work had been infringed. 2) The fact that some of these code fragments may also be contained in the CLX would in itself invalidate any potential claims of infringement (this really needs to be looked into). 3) The average user of FPC does not need to be worried about this affecting their own code (unless their own code happens to include some of the offending code, and even then see #1 above). 4) The biggest concern I see is not the potential copyright penalties, but the negative publicity and reception in the open source and developer community. Note that I would be drawing different conclusions if the allegations were involving a substantial portion of the codebase instead of just fragments. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
