[OpenAFS] is YFS a "derived work"?
Ted Creedon
tcreedon@easystreet.net
Mon, 1 Oct 2012 10:21:54 -0700
--485b397dd02965731004cb02a482
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
The IP (intellectual property) in YFS seems to be derived from AFS's IP.
If that case can be made, IBM or any other entity could force YFS back into
the open source domain.
The "look and feel" of YFS may also be a problem - see "Broderbund" or
better yet their attorney's web page.
http://www.quinnemanuel.com/attorneys/stern-claude-m.aspx
My direct experience is from a dispute Tektronix had with ParcPlace over
Smalltalk licensing back in the '80's.
AFS may be able to claim infringement against other file systems because of
its prior art (but its unpatented?).
Which brings up a point, has IBM or CMU protected AFS's IP in any way?
Tedc
--485b397dd02965731004cb02a482
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The IP (intellectual property) in YFS seems to be derived from AFS's IP=
.<br><br>If that case can be made, IBM or any other entity could force YFS =
back into the open source domain.<br><br>The "look and feel" of Y=
FS may also be a problem - see "Broderbund" or better yet their a=
ttorney's web page.<br>
<br><a href=3D"http://www.quinnemanuel.com/attorneys/stern-claude-m.aspx">h=
ttp://www.quinnemanuel.com/attorneys/stern-claude-m.aspx</a><br><br>My dire=
ct experience is from a dispute Tektronix had with ParcPlace over Smalltalk=
licensing back in the '80's.<br>
<br>AFS may be able to claim infringement against other file systems becaus=
e of its prior art (but its unpatented?).<br><br>Which brings up a point, h=
as IBM or CMU protected AFS's IP in any way?<br><br>Tedc<br><br>
--485b397dd02965731004cb02a482--