But Sir, the horse, while dead, has not yet been beaten into constituent molecules. May we flog it for a while longer?
But Sir, the horse, while dead, has not yet been beaten into constituent molecules. May we flog it for a while longer?
Wrong. We are switching from the "licensed consumer" era to the "franchisee prospective consumer" era. They are "teleolinked" in an "interpretative" way from the clear "trollintentions" of the original copyright holders, which donated their code with the hidden intention to stole back all subsequent customization, because we all known that Berkeley is not a city but a GNU! /s
It kind of contradicts its own reason to exist. If everyting is free to use, modify and redistribute, what's the purpose of any license on it?
Because if you publish a piece of code without a license, the Berne Convention, "requires protection for all creative works in a fixed medium be automatic, and last for at least 50 years after the author's death for any work".
The point of it is that the software itself doesn't change licenses just because it's in your possession and included in your product. Except in rare cases the original source code is out there somewhere, it's whatever source that, in this case Sony, added to that which isn't required to be provided. And, in large part to prevent the software from having its licensed changes those files have to retain the license. It also somewhat protects against somebody getting the source and then pretending that it belongs to them and send a bunch of cease and desist letters to other people using the code that they got.
Is it relevant without being a public system? I'm running a modified FreeBSD in several stores. It's not published. They have to call me at problems. It also doesn't contain any license documents and isn't registered somewhere as property. Doing this since 7.0 or so. Advantage is that nobody knows what I'm talking about anyway when it gets technical.
Search the eCFR for "representation."
The FTC also works with competition and consumer protection agencies around the world to promote cooperation and sound policy approaches. The FTC has built strong relationships with its counterparts abroad, and helps countries around the world to develop and enhance their competition and consumer protection programs.
Doesn't matter, it doesn't change the fact that nothing about the BSD license requires further sharing of the code that you're using. The FTC has absolutely no right or statutory requirement to get involved in this. That's doubly so right now with Trump being in control of the agency and them in general not being terribly interested in upholding customer rights. Not that a different President would lead to a different result as there's simply no leg to stand on here. The code that Sony has used is still out there, we can still access and use that, and the code that they themselves wrote without contributing back is not required to be contributed back.
You have to talk with lawyer experienced with copyright to get better advices. And BTW, have you finished another law course or the first one is "enough" for you to change the world?
Is it relevant without being a public system? I'm running a modified FreeBSD in several stores. It's not published. They have to call me at problems. It also doesn't contain any license documents and isn't registered somewhere as property. Doing this since 7.0 or so. Advantage is that nobody knows what I'm talking about anyway when it gets technical.
I don't think it makes any difference in my case but it's probably different if it was a public downloadable system. I might add a disclaimer for people destroying their computers by using it and then blame me.
