Subject: Re: Licenses vs. public domain
From: Ben_Tilly@trepp.com
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 14:55:28 -0400


Tim O'Reilly wrote:
> Ben_Tilly@trepp.com wrote:
> >
> > This is not, incidentally, a hypothetical example.  IIRC at one point
> > Microsoft did indeed take Perl, and port it to Windows from Unix (as a
> > move to help them break into the web market).  They spun off a small
> > company (or hired them to do the work, I don't know and I am sure that
> > I am about to be corrected anyways) call Hip Communications for this
> > purpose.
>
> They hired Hip.

As I said. :-)

> > Hip, for obvious reasons, did not want to give up their changes.  Even
> > worse, they could not do so because Microsoft had incorporated some of
> > their intellectual property to allow Perl to be integrated into IIS.
> > (Look up PerlScript.)  OTOH they most assuredly were not meeting
> > either the GPL or the Artistic licenses - not even close.  This was
> > the cause of some...unpleasantness shall we say?
> >
> > As things worked out the situation did get resolved peacefully.
>
> This didn't happen by magic.  O'Reilly invested in ActiveState on the
> condition that the windows and UNIX versions of perl be reunited, and
> instigated and project-managed an effort called OnePerl to make it so.

I knew the general story, but I don't know the details.  I for one
would find it interesting to have somewhere a collection of case
examples of license infringements, what happened, how it was resolved,
and (from the point of view of the participants) important lessons
learned.  Some sort of, "Examples for people to ponder."

This would be particularly valuable for people who are considering
what kinds of licenses to use.

Heck, get enough together and you could write a book... :-)

Cheers,
Ben