On 4/9/07, mark at mark.mielke.cc <mark at mark.mielke.cc> wrote: > > Writing from scratch is an unusal description for a protocol that I do > not believe to be well documented. :-) > > I suggest that Dave is speaking about offering credit to the original > authors of any works that are used as a reference for re-implementation. > Even if not legally required, it is a gesture of goodwill that would > avoid people being upset, such as Trent on a similar issue. > > In terms of legality, it is grey. If I could prove in a court of law > that your code was originally mine, it doesn't matter if you change > the names of a few variables, or changing the indentation. This came > up with the recent SCO claims to UNIX, and therefore Linux. In a true > clean-room implementation, the coders would preferably have never seen > the code they are re-implementing. If I can prove that my coders have > never even looked at the software, than any similarities could be more > easily written off as coincidence, or common programmer methodologies > or patterns. > > For Netrek, I doubt that you could write a Netrek client without using > another implementation as a reference. It might be re-architected, but > the content will be the same. I see. Thanks mark. Maybe we can have "Write netrek client in clean room" contest to attract wider netrek attention from the global developers community :) Zach