Re:An exoskeleton let a paralyzed man walk, then its maker r...
by zulban on Friday October 11, 2024 @11:41PM
(#41816213)
Have you completely misunderstood the concept here? This isn't some IP virus that infects anyone that touches it. J&J keeps the IP that it owns, in all cases, obviously. The bankrupt company must release the IP that the bankrupt company owns, unless someone like J&J wants to acquire it and keep things running. Obviously a company that fails wouldn't destroy the IP of another company. Obviously the failed company only impacts the failed company IP. I think you may be trying too hard to find flaws in this idea, instead of trying to make it work.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:An exoskeleton let a paralyzed man walk, then its maker r...
by dangrossman on Friday October 11, 2024 @11:52PM
(#41816269)
Maybe I have? Could you explain your understanding of it? If it doesn't extend past the software the hardware vendor directly wrote, then it doesn't result in hardware owners being able to continue running the hardware after the manufacturer goes bankrupt, which was the purpose of the proposed "fantasy law".
Re:An exoskeleton let a paralyzed man walk, then its maker r...
by z3phyr on Saturday October 12, 2024 @12:28AM
(#41816403)
Maybe allow others to replace the firmware with their own?
Re:An exoskeleton let a paralyzed man walk, then its maker r...
by Sankozi on Saturday October 12, 2024 @03:45AM
(#41817227)
If closed source solution of bankrupt company used closed source solution of a non-bankrupt company then you just need a new licence. If non-bankrupt company is not issuing new licences then it is not supporting its software -> it needs to open source it. You can apply this rule recursively.
The only problem I see is the licence cost (or should it cost anything for existing licence owners of bankrupt company).