What happens if not everyone responds to the emails?
They choose to see that as implicit agreement. Hope they consulted with lawyers on that one.
> + *) Removed old DES API.
> + [Rich Salz]
"If we do not hear from you, we will assume that you have no objection"I'm confused, because they seem to have decent counsel assisting (SFLC). Jim Wright from Oracle (who is interviewed) knows his stuff too.
Even a self contained file isn't so straightforward as how would you differentiate between "new code" and simply copying the old one as a "new patch"?
"It is possible that there may be Mozilla source files containing contributed code for which the copyright holders refuse to grant permission for relicensing under the MPL/GPL/LGPL triple license. In those cases we will investigate whether the situation can be resolved by someone writing new code to replace the code which cannot be relicensed. (This may require writing a complete new source file, or simply rewriting one or more portions of an existing file.)"
https://www-archive.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html#per...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_Laboratories,_Inc.....
In particular, in Oracle v. Google it turned out that Google employed the same person (Joshua Bloch) to write a bunch of Dalvik core libraries who had previously written the same Java core libraries, and that somehow was not an issue in the case. Only the nine identical lines of rangeCheck were an issue. So I'm questioning my understanding of the law here.
Exposure increases the risk that work that appears like it might be derivative will be found to derivative, but there is no legal rule about it, it's just evidence from which a trier of fact might, in combination with other evidence, conclude derivation in violation of copyright.
Clean room means that (presuming the trier of fact accepts that it was a clean room) there can be no derivation or copying, because there was no access to the source from which that could have occurred. This isn't about the legal rule directly, but about evidence from which one might conclude that a violation of the rule occurred.
Of course, given API copyrights, rewriting code to implement the API of existing code is potentially problematic even with a clean room implementation, since the API is preserved.
I worked on certain financial data models for long enough (9 years, a quarter of my life) that they're burned into my brain. Even though it's been 4 years since I've worked for that company, I could easily reproduce probably at least 90% of the data model with a fairly high degree of accuracy. That is stuff I cannot unlearn or forget. I never signed a non-compete, but I did sign an NDA that expired after a year, so I'd be in the clear if I were to re-implement something similar (I wouldn't - the data model was awful).