Quoting Chris Travers (ch...@metatrontech.com): > For example, suppose I start selling a binary-only table engine for > MySQL which offers real benefits over Innodb. Let's say less bloat, > less maintenance, faster performance, and no issues with thread > deadlocks when multi-row inserts are done. Suppose this is > dynamically linked and I ship with an installer that detects installed > MySQL versions and installs against this. The installer asks for a > license key which is used to determine how many client access licenses > you have purchased. I sell CAL's for $50/client.
As always, it depends on the various facts of the case and how well argued, if the matter were taken to court. Again, the judge determines whether there has been copying of copyright-eligible expressive elements into a new work. I see from taking a brief look at the recent judge's order in the Google/Oracle case dismissing a bunch of claims that he said those claims were based on literal copying of non-eligible expressive elements that might be patentable but not copyrightable (idea/expression dichotomy). > After all, *all* have done is use an API owned by Oracle (my money > would also be that they'd sue me to try to win anyway, see Google v. > Oracle). Whether that is _all_ that you have done would depend on the various facts of the case and how well argued, if the matter were taken to court. _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss