Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 11:07:05 +0930 (CST) From: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> To: imdave@synet.net (Dave Bodenstab) Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Opinions wanted on a non-disclosure agreement Message-ID: <199605200137.LAA20327@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <199605191633.LAA02025@base486> from "Dave Bodenstab" at May 19, 96 11:33:49 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dave Bodenstab stands accused of saying: > -- > -- In the case of operating systems where software is distributed in > -- the form of source code, the source code can be distributed provided > -- the following statement is included at the top of all <device Y> > -- related, distributable source code files: "This software was created > -- with the help of proprietary information belonging to <Company X>." > -- > -- Licensee shall use the confidential information only for the above > -- stated purposes, unless otherwise agreed to by further written > -- agreement of the parties, and shall keep confidential and not > -- disclose the confidential information to another person, firm or > -- corporation. > > Now, the problem I have is that the last two terms seem contradictory. > If I release the source under the 2nd to last term, then any third > party can discern the *proprietary information* by examining the source, > thus, I would be violating the last term. It's a tough one. I would perhaps ask the company for clarification of the last paragraph, perhaps by appending "other than as my be discerned from source code or comments as described in the previous clause". They may want to go further and restrict you from quoting their documentation verbatim in your comments and such, which is a bit tight but not unreasonable. Nevertheless, this is a pretty significant concession for them to make, and it shows that they're happy with the spirit of the deal. If you can ensure that they understand that it may be possible to discern some of the 'confidential information' from the code you may write while in posession of the information, and they accept this, then you're home dry. > The company apparently wants to retain the right to patent their software > and believes that releasing the interface specs would somehow interfere > with this. Not that I care... I don't want their software, I just > want to talk to their hardware from my FreeBSD box! Understandable. I think that they would be concerned of running foul of the 'prior art' issue with their patent application. Which is stupid, patenting software is a joke. > Bottom line then: since this would be just a project for *fun*, does > this look like its something that I should consider getting involved with? Yes! Just put lots of comments in your code, so that once you've gone on to something else, it's possible to work on the code without the 'confidential information' 8) > Dave Bodenstab -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control (ph/fax) +61-8-267-3039 [[ ]] Collector of old Unix hardware. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199605200137.LAA20327>