Home » Posts tagged "legal"

原來 Oracle 與 Microsoft 裡的條款是這樣來的...

看到「That time Larry Ellison allegedly tried to have a professor fired for benchmarking Oracle」這篇文章的講古,想起很久前就有聽過 Microsoft 有這樣的條款 (禁止未經原廠同意公開 benchmark 結果),原來是 Oracle 在三十幾年前創出來的?而且這種條款還有專有名詞「DeWitt Clauses」,出自當初被搞的教授 David DeWitt...

Microsoft 的條款是這樣:

You may not disclose the results of any benchmark test … without Microsoft’s prior written approval

Oracle 的則是:

You may not disclose results of any Program benchmark tests without Oracle’s prior consent

IBM 的反而在 license 裡面直接允許:

Licensee may disclose the results of any benchmark test of the Program or its subcomponents to any third party provided that Licensee (A) publicly discloses the complete methodology used in the benchmark test (for example, hardware and software setup, installation procedure and configuration files), (B) performs Licensee’s benchmark testing running the Program in its Specified Operating Environment using the latest applicable updates, patches and fixes available for the Program from IBM or third parties that provide IBM products (“Third Parties”), and © follows any and all performance tuning and “best practices” guidance available in the Program’s documentation and on IBM’s support web sites for the Program…

Yahoo! 與 Mozilla 針對預設搜尋引擎的事情戰起來了...

Mozilla 先前終止與 Yahoo! 的合作後 (在 Firefox 內預設使用 Yahoo! 的搜尋引擎),Yahoo! 提告以及 Mozilla 還手的消息在最近被 Mozilla 揭露:「Mozilla Files Cross-Complaint Against Yahoo Holdings and Oath」。

Yahoo! 提告的檔案 (PDF) 在「2017-12-01-Yahoo-Redacted-Complaint.pdf」,Mozilla 還手的檔案 (PDF) 則是在「2017-12-05-Mozilla-Redacted-X-Complaint-with-Exhibits-and-POS.pdf」這邊。

Firefox 57 釋出時,Mozilla 就把預設的搜尋引擎改回 Google (參考「Mozilla terminates its deal with Yahoo and makes Google the default in Firefox again」),不過當時 Firefox 57 更大的消息是推出了 Quantum,讓瀏覽器的速度拉到可以跟目前的霸主 Google Chrome 競爭的程度,所以就沒有太多人注意到這件事情...

過了幾個禮拜消息比較退燒後,被告以及反過來告的消息出來後,才注意到原來換了搜尋引擎... XD


Apache Foundation 宣佈禁止使用 Facebook BSD+Patents 的軟體

在「RocksDB Integrations」這邊討論到 RocksDBFacebook 所使用的 Facebook BSD+Patents License。

不過因為 RocksDB 最近在換 license (從 Facebook BSD+Patents 換到 Apache License, Version 2.0),移除了 PATENTS 內的限制,需要看 PATENTS 的舊檔案可以在 PATENTS 這邊看到。

Chris Mattmann 正式發出決議禁用 Facebook BSD+Patents License。(參考最後)

另外也提到了 Facebook 是故意埋下這些限制:

Note also Roy's comment that he has discussed the matter with FB's counsel and the word is that the FB license is intentionally incompatible. It is hard to make the argument that it is compatible after hearing that. Pragmatically speaking, regardless of any semantic shaving being done, having a statement like that from the source of the license is very daunting. If they think it is incompatible, we need to not try to wheedle and convince ourselves it is not.

這個 license 之後應該會有更多挑戰...


As some of you may know, recently the Facebook BSD+patents license has been
moved to Category X (https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved#category-x).
Please see LEGAL-303 [1] for a discussion of this. The license is also referred
to as the ROCKSDB license, even though Facebook BSD+patents is its more
industry standard name.

This has impacted some projects, to date based on LEGAL-303
and the detective work of Todd Lipcon:

Samza, Flink, Marmotta, Kafka and Bahir

(perhaps more)

Please take notice of the following policy:

o No new project, sub-project or codebase, which has not
  used Facebook BSD+patents licensed jars (or similar), are allowed to use
  them. In other words, if you haven't been using them, you
  aren't allowed to start. It is Cat-X.

o If you have been using it, and have done so in a *release*,
  you have a temporary exclusion from the Cat-X classification thru
  August 31, 2017. At that point in time, ANY and ALL usage
  of these Facebook BSD+patents licensed artifacts are DISALLOWED. You must
  either find a suitably licensed replacement, or do without.
  There will be NO exceptions.

o Any situation not covered by the above is an implicit
  DISALLOWAL of usage.

Also please note that in the 2nd situation (where a temporary
exclusion has been granted), you MUST ensure that NOTICE explicitly
notifies the end-user that a Facebook BSD+patents licensed artifact exists. They
may not be aware of it up to now, and that MUST be addressed.

If there are any questions, please ask on the legal-discuss@a.o


Chris Mattmann
VP Legal Affairs

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-303


歐盟法院 (The Court of Justice of the European Union) 認為公開無線網路的營運者不需要對使用者的侵權行為負責:「EU Court: Open WiFi Operator Not Liable For Pirate Users」。

不過這是有一些前提的,法院認為應該要符合這幾個要件,營運方才不要負責。基本上完全沒有 filter 限制的無線網路會符合這些條件:

The Court further notes that in order for such ‘mere conduit’ services to be exempt from third party liability, three cumulative conditions must be met:

– The provider must not have initiated the transmission
– It must not have selected the recipient of the transmission
– It must neither have selected nor modified the information contained in the transmission.


In an effort to strike a balance between protecting a service provider from third party liability and the rights of IP owners, the Court ruled that providers can be required to end infringement.

“[T]he directive does not preclude the copyright holder from seeking before a national authority or court to have such a service provider ordered to end, or prevent, any infringement of copyright committed by its customers,” the Court found.

One such measure could include the obtaining of an injunction which would force an operator to password-protect his open WiFi network in order to deter infringement.


On a more positive note, the Court rejected the notion of monitoring networks for infringement or taking more aggressive actions where unnecessary.

“[T]he directive expressly rules out the adoption of a measure to monitor information transmitted via a given network. Similarly, a measure consisting in terminating the internet connection completely without considering the adoption of measures less restrictive of the connection provider’s freedom to conduct a business would not be capable of reconciling the abovementioned conflicting rights,” the Court concludes.


19 歲的英國寫了個機器人程式產生上訴文件,半年成功消滅了一億的罰單

看起來是用 template 加上一些問題組合成的:「A 19-year-old made a free robot lawyer that has appealed $3 million in parking tickets」、「A teenager has saved motorists over £2 million by creating a website to appeal parking fines」。


Once you sign in, a chat screen pops up. To learn about your case, the bot asks questions like "Were you the one driving?" and "Was it hard to understand the parking signs?" It then spits out an appeal letter, which you mail to the court. If the robot is completely confused, it tells you how to contact Browder directly.

網站名稱叫做 www.donotpay.co.uk 也很清楚目的 XDDD

英國法院認為 GCHQ 偷黑別人機器是合法的

出自「Tribunal rules computer hacking by GCHQ is not illegal」這篇報導。在 Edward Snowden 爆料美國與英國政府都在幹黑的後,Privacy International 就提出訴訟控告 GCHQ,但前幾天法院認定這樣是合法的:

Campaigners Privacy International have lost a legal challenge claiming the spying post's hacking operations are too intrusive and break European law.

The case was launched after revelations by US whistleblower Edward Snowden about the extent of US and UK spying.

接下來的戰場會變成在 Investigatory Powers Bill 上面?還是會繼續有上訴?

HTTP Status Code 451

前陣子送出的 HTTP Status Code 451 要通過成為標準了:「Why 451?」。

Today, the IESG approved publication of "An HTTP Status Code to Report Legal Obstacles". It'll be an RFC after some work by the RFC Editor and a few more process bits, but effectively you can start using it now.

取自「華氏451度」這部講出版物言論自由的作品 (紙的燃點是華氏 451 度),在 Internet 時代,451 剛好在 HTTP Status Code 4xx 的範圍,被拿來用做「因法令限制而服法提供內容的 Status Code」。


This document specifies a Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) status code for use when resource access is denied as a consequence of legal demands.

英國將 10Mbps 上網訂為法定權利

在「UK govt to make 10 Mbps broadband a legal right」這邊看到英國政府打算更新法案,逐步將 10Mbps 上網速度訂為法定權利。

目前法定權利是 28.8Kbps 的撥接速度:

Currently, the minimum USO for data access in Britain is just 28.8 Kbps, or dial-up speeds.

打算在今年年底拉高為 2Mbps,並且在 2020 年拉高為 10Mbps:

Under the proposal, the minimum speed specified by the USO will be raised to 2 Mbps by the end of the year, before further increasing to 10 Mbps by 2020.

英國首相 David Cameron 公開說明,internet 應該被認定為基本權利:

"Access to the internet shouldn’t be a luxury; it should be a right – absolutely fundamental to life in 21st century Britain," Cameron said.