Below is the copyright statement of OpenCV, I don't know what everyone's license: // important: read before downloading, copying, installing or using.
// by downloading, copying, installing or using the software you agree to this license.
// if you do not agree to this license, do not download, install, copy or use the software.
// Intel License Agreement
// for Open Source Computer Vision Library
// CopyRight (C) 2000, Intel Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
// Third Party Copyrights Are Property of Their Respective Owners.
//
// Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or welxi,
// Are Permitted Provided That The Following Conditions Are Met:
//
// * Redistribution's of Source Code Must Retain The Above Copyright Notice,
// this list of conditions and the folowing disclaim.
//
// * Redistribution's in Binary Form Must Reproduce The Above Copyright Notice,
// this List of conditions and the folload disclaimer in the documentation
// and / or other matials provided with the distribution.
//
// * The name of Intel Corporation May Not Be Used to Endorse or Promote Products
// Derived from this Software Without Specific PRIOR WRITTEN Permission.
//
// this Software Is Provided by The Copyright Holders and Contributors "As IS" and
// Any Express Or Implied Warranties, Including, But Not Limited to, The Implied
// Warranties of Merchantability and Fitness for a particular purpose is disclaimed.
//
// in no Event shall The Intel Corporation or Contributors Be Liable for Any Direct,
// Indirect, Incidental, Special, Exemplary, OR Consequential Damages
// (Including, But Not Limited to, Procurement of Substitute Goods Or Services; // Loss of Use, Data, or Profits; Or Business Interruption) However Caused
// and ON Any THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN Contract, Strict Liability,
// Or Tort (Including NEGLIGENCE or otherwise) arising in any way out of
// The use of this software, EVEN IF Advised of the Possibility of Such Damage.
//
//M * / Jiang Ge Ping: Another tragedy in the public domain of Intel Valia
-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ http://www.sina.com.cn January 23, 2005 22:01 Sina Technology has recently, and the Intel complaints should reach the concerns of intellectual property and public domain. The core of the problem is that the transformation of private products is part of the public domain, such as standards, interfaces, etc., how to define the relevant social responsibility of the private property rights department and the public rights related to the public. I believe that the standards, interfaces such as interoperability are different from the general product, and once the facts are monopolized, the property owners have social responsibility to open them as public products; and society, general enterprises, and public rights for sharing standards and interfaces .
This is a good ratio, private road, as a private product, of course, can be exclusive; but if this private road ends, it is necessary to develop into an intersection in the future, becoming a road to different roads or other private roads. Original private, there is social responsibility to change this small road, from private roads into highways. The public also has the right to share the mouth in order to pass the private road without entering the private road. Suppose, the owner of the private road claims that the right to use the road must be used together with the right to enter the private road, bundled with purchase to obtain it; otherwise, regardless of whether the public has been jointly connected, how many roads have been repaired, Reverse the line, which will form a tragedy in the public domain. Its essence is that the private sector refuses to undertake the corresponding corporate social responsibility.
Summary of the case
Let us now see a specific case. Comprehensive Intel and Dongjin two statements, the fact is as follows:
According to Intel Prosecution, Shenzhen Dongjin Communication Technology Co., Ltd. is in DBDK in D-Series Communication Products, using the header files in SR5.1.1, using the header files (hereinafter referred to as "Intel header file") The behavior constitutes infringement of Intel copyright.
SR5.1.1 is Intel's application software development kits, support and five categories of communication boards for the production of Intel or their subsidiaries, including voice card, fax card, conference resource card, etc. Intel products must be used in the use of SR5.1.1 and getting the software to use it normally. Users can only use and rely on this SR5.1.1 software to develop applications and function on all functions related to Intel products. SR5.1.1 consists of multiple software and files, including, but not limited to, driver, dynamic link library file layers, and application interface layers defined primarily by Intel header files (API) Wait. The Intel License Agreement clearly stipulates that users can develop their own applications only on Intel's products or users who contain related Intel products (including their components such as Intel header files, etc.) to develop their own application. The Intel header of the API layer in the component of SR5.1.1 is arranged and defined for the function and parameters of the entire software programming must be used, thus constitute an important core part of SR5.1.1. Dynamic link library files and drivers must not change the main content of the Intel header files without changing, in order to run and work. The user must not change the main content of the Intel header file to be able to develop its own application software.
Since Dialogic products have placed a naming rule (similar to private protocol or user interface) in the "First Document" in the "header file" has changed the factual standard for the industry.
The writing of Dongjin Product Related Software ("The Software") refers to the relevant content of the Dialogic product related software ("Dialogic Software" source file (hereinafter referred to as "header file"), the user is installing In the process of compiling its user program, it is also necessary to use "header file"; "header file" is also required to disclose and freely download documents on the Internet, but the copyright owner "header file" also declares: "Header" is not publicized; the Dongjin product is the same as Dialogic product function (or similar), but there is a large difference in chip selection, circuit design, software writing, etc. Given that "header file" is only a small component in the complete Dialogic software, it is neither a separate software, nor has corresponding integrity and independence. The order in the "header file" can be adjusted at will, and "header file" itself does not include expression of software design ideas or design techniques.
Case study
Dialogic products and SR5.1.1 as an application software development kit, equivalent to private roads. "Header file" is just a small component in a complete Dialogic software, not a separate software. Its role is to provide interconnection between various hardware and software. It is equivalent to the cross at the end of the private road.
Dialogic products have an absolute monopoly position in the market. This makes other competitive products, must be consistent with it standard and interface. Dynamic link library files and drivers must not change the main content of the Intel header files without changing, in order to run and work. The user must not change the main content of the Intel header file to be able to develop its own application software. This is equivalent to making the Dialogic product to become the way to other roads. In the component of SR5.1.1, the Intel header of the API layer is arranged and defined for the function and parameters of the entire software programming must be used, which is equivalent to the traffic rules that specifies the traffic lights of the road. The monopoly characteristics are in the system level, that is, the first level of the public platform, forming the factual standard.
Although the Dongjin product is the same (or similar) and is compatible with the Dialogic product function, there is a large difference in chip selection, circuit design, software writing, etc. Explain that Dongjin is advancing, not the same "road" in the Dialogic product, but in repairing another "road", just to borrow the mouthwise.
The Intel License Agreement clearly stipulates that users can develop their own applications only on Intel's products or users who contain related Intel products (including their components such as Intel header files, etc.) to develop their own application. This is equivalent to the owner of the private road, claims that only the private road will pay the money for the entire private road, and there is a rights used in the mouth. Looking back in history, Microsoft bundles the operating system with the application, similar to this, and the result is to incur a negative monopoly attack of the US government. Binding the system and the application, is a protruding feature of monopoly. Its harm is hindering competition. In bundled applications and competitive applications, consumer interests have been monopoly.
Theoretical analysis
Incident, the core is the license issue of intellectual property rights. In this case, the permission of the header file is manifested.
Intellectual property is actually a license. Lay Dratler, JR. In most "Intellectual Property License" up and down, this issue is the most authoritative description. He pointed out: "The license is the right to make the property under the conditions of the ownership of the property," License Agreement - is a contract "of the property rights in the case of transferring intellectual property without transferring ownership."
Intellectual property people, whether to have absolute permissions? There is a illusion that people think that who produces, who has, this is the rule of the sky. Intellectual property people's products, including each part of the product, who wants to make who permit to who, who wants to give anyone, no one can give it. But it is not the case in the professional legal. In the famous RTE VS European Commission, the European Court (ECJ) believes: "The TV station relies on the national copyright law, refuses to provide basic information about channel, date, time, and program name, hindering a consumer demand. The creation of new products. " Intel is based on intellectual property, refuses to provide basic information about communication interface Driver, Library Files, and APIs, whether to hinder the creation of Dongjin new products in consumer demand? I personally think that these two cases are the same.
We need to understand this problem from two aspects. The first aspect is a non-voluntary license. That is, regardless of whether intellectual property rights are not voluntarily, it must provide permission. Or, whether he is subjectively licensed to use the product, it must be open. The second aspect is the right to abuse. That is, when the intellectual owner is in a monopoly status, he is suspected of using a series of unfair means such as bundling, abuse monopoly power, hindering competition.
I think that Intel's complaints will be invited by these two aspects.
The conclusion is that Intel's license is illegal, it is not legal, Dongjin does not involve substantially infringement; not only this, Intel's bundle, but there is an abuse of monopoly obstructing competition.
Since it feels, use the public interface to develop more competitive products, a good thing to consumers.
