Intellectual property and management fashion (was: How to protect python code ?)

[Cameron Laird]

In article <5ppka.23067$It5.15751 at news2.central.cox.net>,
Steve Holden <sholden at holdenweb.com> wrote:
			.
			.
			.
>>   "How could it possibly be of benefit to a business to *pay* to become
>>   dependent on software they don't control?"
>>
>> Thus, a rhetorical question perhaps.  The "What kind of business" was
>> not a query for what *industry* the business is in, but rather in a
>> spirit of "what kind of idiot".
>>
>
>Of course, the businesses that make a good living out of proprietary
>software encourage all sorts of FUD about open source. Consequently, large
>organizations implement rules forbidding the use of open source software
>products because "they aren't supported" when in fact the support for some
>open source products is actually superior to that of most proprietary
>products.
>
>The fact of the matter is that most companies would prefer to pay for a
>black-box proprietary product because ultimately there's assumed to be a
>responsible (and accountable) organization behind it. If they bothered to
>read the licenses, of course, they'd realize that the producer's liability
>is usually limited to the purchase price of the software.
			.
			.
			.
Hey, me, I only know what the mass media tell me; that, for
example, if I buy from Microsoft, I can expect to end up in
court <URL: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,985552,00.asp >:
"There's one thing Microsoft officials ... agree on:  SQL Server
users should comb through code to determine if they're at risk of
being dragged into court.  . . .  If companies determine there
may be grounds for patent infringement [from use of Microsoft
products as documented by Microsoft], Microsoft officials are
advising them to take it up with" the patent holder.

As a non-lawyer, I understand this to support the proposition
that, when I buy from Microsoft, I first need to investigate
all of Microsoft's affairs, to be certain the product I intend
to buy doesn't infringe on any patents.  So:  as a Microsoft
customer, my liability is essentially unlimited, while Micro-
soft's "is usually limited to the purchase price of the 
software."

It's good to know that.
-- 

Cameron Laird <Cameron at Lairds.com>
Business:  http://www.Phaseit.net
Personal:  http://phaseit.net/claird/home.html