gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Design vs. Implementation


From: Barry Margolin
Subject: Re: Design vs. Implementation
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 01:47:48 -0500
User-agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.4 (PPC Mac OS X)

In article <mailman.193.1111729435.28103.gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org>,
 Don Parris <evangelinux@matheteuo.org> wrote:

> I just want to clarify my understanding here.  If this bit confuses you,
> please be patient with me - I might be the one confused. ;)
> 
> I have a database design - no code yet.  I need to determine whether the GPL
> will be appropriate or not for this situation.  The GPL is my preferred
> license, but it may not be appropriate in this case.  I assume that the GPL
> would only apply to the actual code, and not to the design of the database

IANAL, but I believe that's correct.  The GPL is enforced by copyright, 
and copyright only applies to code, not the ideas that the code 
implements.

> itself.  If this is true, then it might be possible to offer a GPL'ed
> implementation and another implementation under a different license.

You can even do that with the *same* implementation.  You can license it 
to one party under the GPL, and license it to another party under a 
different license.  Each party would be obliged to obey the license they 
received.

> I designed the database at home, but want to have the opportunity to
> implement it at my job, which will require the use of MS Access.  If I could
> offer the back-end using PostgreSQL or MySQL (or something similar), and
> then let them build a front-end using Access, that would be different.  I do
> not foresee that happening any time soon.
> 
> I will have to create the complete database using MS Access for the job. 
> The home-based version would use one of the free/open source databases.  Any
> input is welcome.

You'd better confirm with your employer that the code you wrote at home 
is yours to do with as you wish.  Many employment agreements have a 
non-compete clause that says that anything you implement that's within 
the scope of the company's business belongs to them, even if you do it 
on your own time.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]