| From: | Daniel Adler |
| Date: | 5 Sep 2000 at 13:08:51 |
| Subject: | AMIOPEN: Legal issues and licensing models (was Elate Ports & Legal Rubbish) |
Hi Amiga inc.
>
>No, our SDK (other than the actual GPL stuff) is proprietary.
>
Okay, i think, now its time for a more precise description of what's the
exact licensing model, we are all in now (by paying for the sdk).
Is it possible for us developers to produce own sys-images with the sysgen tool?
Especially in the case, where someone wants to use this technology to build its
own kernel - maybe substitute elate-tools with rewritten ones.
If someone writes an application or a whole framework with the tao-technology,
to whom we are related to? (amiga or tao?)
When we want to publish informations about the whole thing, do we have some
restrictions yet. I read, that tao sees itself as a human-capital company - that
sounds for me, that "VP, tool-technology, ElateOS, Agent/Alias-oriented Drivers,
debugging Flightrecorders etc." is something, they don't want to give away through
some cheap sdk-license and allow others to spread their hard work, maybe reengineered
by some geeks that think to open-source the stuff.
I heard, we are allowed to release software that has been build with the AmigaSDK
up to 2001.
What if it contains specific stuff like the "tool-format", VP-opcodes (e.g own debuggers)
and concepts taken from it, that will be releases open-source (as an extreme example)?
How does it fit in your concept of '"rule" the world'?
Please explain your relationship to tao in more detail, thanks.