RE: derived works

["Jeff Hill" <johill@lanl.gov>]

Title: RE: derived works

One more important point.

 

In R3.14 we took the important step of moving all of the OS interface layers into a

common area in libCom. In contrast, in the past I maintained some of them in with the

CA client library because the CA client library was the only part of base that was portable

at that time. The consolidated approach makes porting EPICS to a new OS easier.

 

Michael has in his published version of EPICS placed his derived version of my source code into

libCom. His derived code now occupies exactly the same niche in libCom that my original version

does in the decapitated CVS trunk.

 

Note that the Michael’s derived version neither currently works correctly nor makes any

attempt to conform to the interface that my work in the decapitated CVS trunk requires.

Some people may ask this question; what is the problem with what Michael has done, he

can maintain his version and Jeff can maintain his version and we can all be happy. The

problem with that approach is that porting EPICS is now harder because I would be

forced to maintain private copies of at least some of the OS interface layers in CA.

Something that I am definitely not in favor of doing.

 

Sorry about the interruption,

 

Jeff
______________________________________________________
Jeffrey O. Hill           Email        johill@lanl.gov
LANL MS H820              Voice        505 665 1831
Los Alamos NM 87545 USA   FAX          505 665 5107

 

Message content: TSPA

 

From: tech-talk-bounces@aps.anl.gov [mailto:tech-talk-bounces@aps.anl.gov] On Behalf Of Jeff Hill
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 10:41 AM
To: 'Dalesio, Leo'
Cc: tech-talk@aps.anl.gov
Subject: RE: derived works

 

Ø  I'll contact my legal department today

 

I hope that you find this to be constructive.

 

This is a relatively small piece of code, and with enough effort it is always possible to

take the concepts and write a completely new code (it really helps to have the original ideas

and the original source code to look at). Maybe it’s even strictly  legal to take the low road.

I think the wider issue is this; we get to choose, we can work together or duplicate effort

creating  functionally equivalent codes. Hence my feeling compelled to consume some

bandwidth to discuss the issue on tech-talk.

 

Jeff
______________________________________________________
Jeffrey O. Hill           Email        johill@lanl.gov
LANL MS H820              Voice        505 665 1831
Los Alamos NM 87545 USA   FAX          505 665 5107

 

Message content: Correspondence

 

From: Dalesio, Leo [mailto:dalesio@bnl.gov]
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 10:04 AM
To: Jeff Hill
Cc: tech-talk@aps.anl.gov
Subject: RE: derived works

 

 

>Point of fact, LANL copyright and my authorship are clearly stated within
>the original
>source code.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Some other points of fact.

Strictly speaking - it is a work that was based on the concepts not copied.
No author was listed - not you nor Michael.
We can have our legal departments discuss the issue.
I'll contact my legal department today. They are very helpful this way.
We'll let you know the results. We will also share them with tech-talk so that we can all learn the strict legal interpretation of authorship. I think this is not the first time this has struck a nerve.