It's not quite so absurd, though, when you consider that MUMPS is
traditionally interpreted, and if you change the code on the system
where it is intended to run, then you are effectively modifying the
executable. It's not just a matter of making a copy of the source
code and saying "Don't touch this."
===
Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Without the requirement of mathematical aesthetics a great many
discoveries would not have been made."
-- Albert Einstein
On Jul 8, 2005, at 1:14 PM, Cameron Schlehuber wrote:
You're right. Those 14 lines or so are absurd on several levels.
One, it's
contradictory with the nature of copyrighting software generated by
federal
employees (or contract employees). Two, while Imaging is considered a
medical device by the FDA, what is regulated is its use, not the
copying or
distribution of the source code. As a simple example, pacemakers are
patented in the US Patent and Trademark Office and copies of their
designs
are readily available to anyone without ever running afoul of the
FDA. Of
course, how one uses that information may be regulated by the FDA
depending
on how you use it.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the 'Do More With Dual!' webinar happening
July 14 at 8am PDT/11am EDT. We invite you to explore the latest in dual
core and dual graphics technology at this free one hour event hosted by HP,
AMD, and NVIDIA. To register visit http://www.hp.com/go/dualwebinar
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
