On 1/2/07, Garrett Rooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/17/06, Cliff Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joe, > > Not seeing the word "distribute" in the license, I would agree this > needs to be clarified. There's an interesting mix of copyright terms > ("copy", "derivative works"), patent terms ("use", "make"), and even > an attribution requirement that is typically associated with > distribution. However, without a word like "distribute" (or even > "communicate"), I agree we should get some clarification on this.There's a memo on the IETF site that may clarify some things here... http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/RSA-MD-all I'm not sure if this helps us or not, it says that derivative works can be sold, but doesn't seem to explicitly say if they can be distributed. Wouldn't "sold" imply distribution though? If someone with more of a clue in this matter could take a look and see if that memo resolves things, or if we need to do some more leg work to be sure that would be great.
Uhh, anyone? It'd be really great if someone with more clue in this are (Cliff, Roy, one of our lawyers, etc) could take a look at this and let me know if it resolves our problem or not. If not, I'll look into an alternate solution (either asking RSA for an explicit clarification or replacing the code somehow). Thanks, -garrett
