examples of realistic multiprocessing usage?

[Adam Skutt]

On Jan 20, 11:51 pm, Albert van der Horst <alb... at spenarnc.xs4all.nl>
wrote:
> This is what some people want you to believe. Arm twisting by
> GPL-ers when you borrow their ideas? That is really unheard of.

Doesn't matter, you're still legally liable if your work is found to
be derivative and lacking a fair use defense.  It's not borrowing
"ideas" that's problematic, it's proving that's all you did.  For
those of us with legal departments, we have no choice: if they don't
believe we can prove our case, we're not using the code, period.  The
risk simply isn't worth it.

> GPL-ers are not keen on getting the most monetary award by
> setting lawyers on you and go to court only reluctantly to
> enforce the license.

And?  Monetary award is hardly the only issue.

> Stealing code means just that, verbatim copies. When you read this
> carefully, you can see that reimplementing the stolen code is
> an option. Exactly what you say is legally impossible.

No, in the United States it means anything that constitutes a
derivative work, since derivative works of GPL-licensed works must be
released under the GPL.  Merely copying ideas does not make one a
derivative work, but one also must be prepared to show that's all that
happened.  As such, it would have to be a substantially different
implementation, generally with some sort of added or useful value.
Proving that can be difficult and may very well depend on what court
you land in.

>
> So pardon me, but not even looking at code you might learn from
> is pretty hysteric.

Not at all.  Separating ideas from implementation can be difficult,
and convincing a judge of that vastly more so.  It's a legitimate
concern, and people who intend to ship proprietary software should
definitely resort to GPL-licensed software last when looking for
inspiration.

Adam