clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:

> - For the re-licensing to happen, some effort may have to be put into
> weeding out 3rd party code that has incompatible licensing terms; such
> pieces of code would have to be re-written from scratch before making
> the code publicly available (such as on GitHub).

I have a few questions about this, as IP remains very gray and thorny for me.

There are instances where a work may be cited as an excerpt, may be used for
parody, etc.   Are there the same / similar  rules for code?
I believe there are, and I've read some somewhere, I'm just not intimately
familiar with the rules governing this area.

I'm SO just leaving it at that.

Second, might it not be expedient to identify the 3rd party snippets and just
stick in a placeholder comment?
// this performs an FFT
// this does some specialized calculation
// this is code for the well-known Dasblinkenlights algorithm...

Is it permissible to post links to online instances of any such code?

Is it permissible to supply self-encapsulated compiled code to act as a
black-box that a developer would need to emulate with their own from-scratch
source code?
For instance, run some code which passes data to that black-box module, which
then passes on processed data to a second set of code...

Can the 3rd party source be "paraphrased" as pseudo code?


I'm just thinking that getting it posted in ANY form would jump-start this, and
it would be FAR faster to give the 3rd party stuff a quick-and dirty
non-functional rewrite in one of the above forms, than actually replace it with
working code.

Post a reply to this message