<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<blockquote
cite="mid:CY1PR14MB0567A6602D29BD8257101DDFB6CC0@CY1PR14MB0567.namprd14.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"><!-- P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} --></style>
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper"
style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<p><br>
</p>
<div>> An MIT license is permissive -- meaning you can do
just about anything with the code, including incorporating it
into proprietary systems.</div>
<div>> </div>
<div>But not I gather changing the license to something more
restrictive. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Doug,<br>
<br>
You can't change the original license - it's not your property to
change; however, as I stated the material covered by the license can
be incorporated into proprietary code and sold. Wikipedia has a good
write up at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CY1PR14MB0567A6602D29BD8257101DDFB6CC0@CY1PR14MB0567.namprd14.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper"
style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<div>-Doug</div>
<div>more..</div>
<div>So a california startup seeking investors, and working in
html/javascript which is easier to scrape and copy, will only
have copyright as a barrier-to/protection-against later
entrants/competitors simply copying all their hard work. So if
they are going to be mixing MIT opensource with their
proprietary efforts, their own work may also become MIT if
mixed in the same file, for example if they modify the code.
Possibly this dilution of protection is causing the
annoying proliferation of 3D formats.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
1) This does not just apply to California.<br>
2) That is the case for all JavaScript code that is downloaded to
the client. Many websites, HTML files, and JavaScript code contain a
notice that the code is copyrighted and licensed according to
certain terms. There are technical means to make it more difficult
to reuse protected code (e.g., obscuration). If you really need to
protect something, you need to keep it under control (meaning at
least on the server and not downloadable).<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CY1PR14MB0567A6602D29BD8257101DDFB6CC0@CY1PR14MB0567.namprd14.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper"
style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<div>more..</div>
<div>Hypotheses for cause of proliferation of 3D formats:</div>
<div>H0: desire by startup investors to enjoy upside potential
of end-user switching costs and LOCKIN</div>
<div>H1: desire by startup investors to protect
proprietary javascript efforts from MIT license pollution and
the lack of BARRIERS-to-entry-and-competition that causes</div>
Proposed solution for H1 BARRIERS: generate abstract standard
suitable for proprietary/copyright implementation (as you are
doing)
<div>Proposed solution for H0 LOCKIN: offer a format
mangling&proprietorization service, including
legacy-to-new importer generation.<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Real reasons:<br>
1) Lazy programmers<br>
2) NIH - not invented here<br>
<br>
Both of these happen before you get to H0. <br>
<br>
All work on abstract standards are suitable for proprietary
implementations. ParallelGraphics Cortona, MediaMachines initial
Flux, BS Contact, SGI's CosmoPlayer were all proprietary
implementations. That did not stop Xj3D, OpenVRML, FreeWRL, X3DOM,
cobweb, H3D and other open-source implementations. All of these
(open and closed) support to varying degrees the display of
open-standards X3D files.<br>
<br>
<br>
Leonard Daly<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CY1PR14MB0567A6602D29BD8257101DDFB6CC0@CY1PR14MB0567.namprd14.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper"
style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<div>
<br>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font
style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000" face="Calibri,
sans-serif"><b>From:</b> x3d-public
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:x3d-public-bounces@web3d.org"><x3d-public-bounces@web3d.org></a> on behalf of
Leonard Daly <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Leonard.Daly@realism.com"><Leonard.Daly@realism.com></a><br>
<b>Sent:</b> January 14, 2016 12:40 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:x3d-public@web3d.org">x3d-public@web3d.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [x3d-public] Call to Progress on X3D
V4</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/14/2016 10:54 AM, doug
sanden wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre> Joe, If x3dom node definitions are not proprietary -if they are
web3d.org- then why doesn't Leonard just snapshot x3dom node
definitions and call it version 4?
Doug,
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>X3DOM is separately licensed under MIT and GNU - making it open source.
The nodes, fields, and design of the internals is open, but not standard.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>Q. what's the difference between open and standard?
-Doug
more..
Hypothesis: similar to previous web3d.org standards, it allows developers to develop competing products.
That means the execution model has been abstracted from code into a design. Much like if you were reverse engineering a product into a design in one room, then giving the design to developers in a second room, to clean out any copyright.
more..
And perhaps that's what's uncertain - does the world need the abstracted design if it has MIT opensource?</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
The MIT license applies to software. The USPTO has rules
that APIs cannot be copyrighted nor patented; however,
there are some conflicting court rulings.
<br>
<br>
The standards document has a copyright that is owned by
Web3D and ISO (in some sort of undetermined relationship).
The current documents have a license that is "All Rights
Reserved". That does not restrict someone from creating
code using that document that implements what is in the
document. It does restrict someone from copying the
descriptions in the document into their code with
permission.<br>
<br>
An MIT license is permissive -- meaning you can do just
about anything with the code, including incorporating it
into proprietary systems.<br>
<br>
By having the abstract structure of the scene as a
standard you can derive multiple formats from it. By
having encodings (formats) as standards, everyone knows
how to express their idea. Including the run-time in the
abstract tells people how these systems should behave and
how they respond to various changes in the environment.<br>
<br>
Having a standard essentially undercuts organizations
forcing buy-in to a particular format. In general, users
do not want that because it becomes harder to change.
Creators do not want that because it limits their
distribution. The only people who like it are those too
lazy to develop something significant and/or want to
control all aspects of your use of the content.<br>
<br>
<br>
Leonard Daly<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Where the abstract design might be handy is if any california investors want their startups to add /create intellectual property in the form of copyright, by re-implementing in their own code, from abstract design. Then hacking/adding their own proprietary differences. That way their own efforts aren't contaminated with MIT license code. That might give them a bit more of the proprietary protection against later competitors copying and pasting. While allowing end-users fairly familiar content format - likely an easy translation from standards-based exporters.
_______________________________________________
x3d-public mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:x3d-public@web3d.org">x3d-public@web3d.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org">http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<font class="tahoma,arial,helvetica san serif"
color="#333366"><font size="+1"><b>Leonard Daly</b></font><br>
3D Systems & Cloud Consultant<br>
X3D Co-Chair on Sabbatical<br>
LA ACM SIGGRAPH Chair<br>
President, Daly Realism - <i>Creating the Future</i>
</font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
x3d-public mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:x3d-public@web3d.org">x3d-public@web3d.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org">http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<font class="tahoma,arial,helvetica san serif" color="#333366">
<font size="+1"><b>Leonard Daly</b></font><br>
3D Systems & Cloud Consultant<br>
X3D Co-Chair on Sabbatical<br>
LA ACM SIGGRAPH Chair<br>
President, Daly Realism - <i>Creating the Future</i>
</font></div>
</body>
</html>