Date: 07 Apr 2002 22:57:13 -0700 From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: FreeBSD Chat <chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Abuses of the BSD license? Message-ID: <26g026zq9y.026@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <3CB1196B.403F465D@mindspring.com> References: <200204051922.06556@silver.dt1.binity.net> <3CAE7037.801FB15F@optusnet.com.au> <3CAEA028.186ED53E@optusnet.com.au> <3CAED90B.F4B7905@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20020406124622.019bfdc8@threespace.com> <3CAF7FB9.3259C392@mindspring.com> <qmu1qmzwkb.1qm@localhost.localdomain> <3CB1196B.403F465D@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> writes: > And trade secrets are not necessarily proprietary; they can > be distributed to a select group. The exclusive rights are > retained by the proprieter, but the secrets themselves are > distributed. Trade secrets are proprietary by law. Your example contradicts your claim when you say "the exclusive rights are retained by the proprieter". How can you say that for an example of something that's not proprietary? Been reading at fsf.org too long? :-) Distribution is irrelevant, like it is with copyright. (You may distribute your copy of a book to many people as long as you don't distribute it to the public.) The funny thing that you observed is that not even trade secrets are necessarily secret, in some sense. (Of course, when they become available to the general public (or become widely known?), they loose their protected trade secret status, IIRC.) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?26g026zq9y.026>