Re: Abandonware???
Re: Abandonware???
- Subject: Re: Abandonware???
- From: Henrique Prange <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 22:00:06 -0300
Hi Ray,
That's it. We, as WebObjects developers, want to move forward with our projects. We need to make changes to the original code. It's inevitable. Reverse engineering the code is our best alternative in that sense. If we were convinced that Apple won't sue us, would anyone object this approach?
IMHO, Paul's discussion is very relevant. And I share the same thoughts. I have a company which main product has been written in WebObjects. My company is at risk already. And let's not pretend have always developed in the Mac. Let's not pretend Wonder hasn't reverse engineering some WebObjects classes. Let's not pretend we won't reverse engineering any classes in the future. Worrying about Apple is my least concern.
So, will Apple enforce its copyright if we reverse engineering the entire WebObjects code base? I doubt there will ever be any certainty related to this matter. Unless we take that first step into the unknown, we'll stay stuck in the past until becoming irrelevant.
Cheers,
Henrique
Sent from my iPhone
> On 5 de out de 2015, at 18:33, Ray Kiddy <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 02 Oct 2015 15:54:37 -0400
> David LeBer <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>> WebObjects - the set of frameworks used by Apple == Not Abandonware
>> WebObjects - the set of frameworks used/enhanced/patched by the
>> community through Wonder == Not Abandonware
>> WebObjects - the set of frameworks supplied by Apple as a supported
>> product == Abandonware
>>
>> My opinion.
>>
>> D
>
> On Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:23:25 -0300
> Henrique Prange <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> "Although such software is usually still under copyright, the owner
>> may not be tracking or enforcing copyright violations."
>>
>> Apple doesn’t need to release the copyright to turn WebObjects into
>> Abandonware. I see no problem if we declare WebObjects as Abandonware
>> and Apple doesn’t enforce its copyright. The real question is: what
>> benefits do we have if WebObjects becomes Abandonware?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Henrique
>
> There is a benefit. For one thing, the TreasureBoat project could have
> gone forward. But there seems to be an understandable reluctance to
> declare that WebObjects (as defined in LeBer-III), is abandonware to
> the extent that the Oracle v Google decision on Java APIs
> (https://www.eff.org/cases/oracle-v-google) would not apply to it.
>
> When we (by some definition of "we", I have no idea what) agree that
> that case does not apply because it is abandonware, TB could start
> again in a heart-beat.
>
> There seem to be too many unknowns, now, to justify the work.
>
> - ray
>
>>
>>>> On 2 de out de 2015, at 20:43, Paul Yu <email@hidden> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 2, 2015, at 7:00 PM, Paul Yu <email@hidden
>>>> <mailto:email@hidden>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Upon further reading of the wiki page.
>>>>
>>>> Due to copyright enforcement duration, it does us no good for us
>>>> to declare WebObjects and its frameworks abandoned by Apple.
>>>> Since Apple has not and will probably not release it copyright
>>>> ownership on the software.
>>>>
>
> <snip>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden