Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 5 Dec 2000 01:07:30 -0600 | From | "Brian F. G. Bidulock" <> | Subject | Re: Fasttrak100 questions... |
| |
Jeff,
Have you also seen this applied where it is to the employer's disadvantage? For example, given that I looked at and worked with GPL code (say Linux kernel) in University before taking employment as a programmer that the employer's product is inevitably contaiminated and no longer a trade secret? Can a previous employee get an injunction against their former employer to cease and desist from using this negative knowledge?
If so, I might have a solution: make the Linux kernel required reading in University programming classes!
On Sat, 02 Dec 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 02, 2000 at 10:42:29PM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 18:21:26 -0700 > > From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@vger.timpanogas.org> > > > > Under this argument, it is argued that the engineer who had source > > code access "inevitably used" negative knowledge he gained from > > his study of the Linux sources. Absent the vague descriptions of > > what a "derivative work" is in the GPL, it could be argued that > > conversion of any knowledge contained in GPL code is a "derivative > > work". > >
-- Brian F. G. Bidulock ¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦ bidulock@openss7.org ¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in ¦ http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying to adapt the world to himself. ¦ ¦ Therefore all progress depends on the ¦ ¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |