webtestgadfly wrote:Been following some of the posts here and there about eValid's advantages over open source alternatives. And I note also on your forum that you guys got a patent of some kind on the eValid implementation.
So my question is this: what's your position in relation to an open source development that "borrows" some of the eValid implementation?
The WebTest Gadfly
(Always making trouble. Always looking forward.)
As you may already know, the issue of open source development vs. patented software is a complex and thorny one.
This is a legal matter and the comments below are not intended to represent that they are coming from an attorney, which I am not.
But here are some informal comments that may shed further light on this issue for you.
There seem to be two main licenses used in open source projects.
The Apache 2.0 license (used for GWT, Selenium, et. al.) clearly mentions that patent rights need to be protected by users, and seems to say that the right to distribute the work product under the Apache 2.0 license is lost if a development contribution violates any copyrights or patents.
The BSD license (used by YUI, Watir, et. al.) also explicitly mentions that patent rights should not abused in an open source development, and also seems to require that appropriate license be obtained from the patent holder if the ideas in the patent are incorporated in the development.
In your case, can you be more specific about what you are asking? Also note that depending on your question(s) the answers may need to be taken offline from this Forum.
-Edward Miller
