Andrei's Google Talk

[klickverbot]

On 9/21/10 5:01 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> People aren't convicted on "possibilities" they are convicted on
> proof.

Okay, I suppose I was not as clear about my point as I hoped I would be:

This is exactly what I wanted to say – if you want to sue somebody for 
copying your code, it has to be proven that they took your code, not 
just possible. But I don't see how just reading other people's code 
would affect that – either you copied it, or you didn't.

My point about the source being freely available on the internet was 
just to illustrate that claiming »But, your honor, I didn't even read 
that other piece of code« does not seem like a very strong defense to me 
*if the court has already been convinced that you copied other code*, 
e.g. by an expert's opinion.

I should also add that I am no lawyer, and I am generally only very 
modestly experienced in legal issues, so please bear with me if my 
questions don't make much sense – I just want to understand the reason 
why Walter is so exceptionally afraid of looking at other projects.

To me, it seems a bit as if a researcher refused to keep himself 
informed about scientific progress in the field he is working on, just 
because he could be accused of stealing from other people (yes, that's a 
weak analogy, I know).

Oh, and I am perfectly aware of the fact that there is no common 
European jurisdiction in these matters, but to the best of my knowledge, 
the laws regarding intellectual property are quite similar from a 
high-level point of view in many European countries – and probably in 
large contrast with US copyright laws, which is what I intended to hint at.