A translation is a devivative work - the copyright owner has the exclusive right to these
So, yes, translation is prima facie copyright infringement.
Strictly speaking, if you translate it, it's a derivative work because you exercised creativity in making the translation; what Google translate does is not a derivative work, it's a copy because there is no ...
First, scanning software for viruses or malware is arguably different from reverse engineering. The anti-virus software is not attempting to duplicate the functionality of the scanned software, and it doesn't generate any sort of report on how the scanned software works.
Second, it will depend specifically on what terms are stated in the EULA. For example, ...
I assume “our” software stack is owned by some company. And “public available code” usually comes with a license.
You are not saying which license. If the code was published under the GPL license for example, adding it to your code is legal. Distributing it without following the terms of the license is copyright infringement. That copyright infringement ...
You don’t need a licence to use your own IP
It’s yours, do what you like with it.
If you choose to licence your IP to particular people or the world at large they must follow the licence(s) you grant irrespective of what you or anyone else does.
You do not own the software, but you do own a copy of a license to the software. "Quiet enjoyment" is between you and your landlord.
Under the terms of the license you will have been granted the right to use the software, and either it specifies a particular restriction about IP address vs. domain, or it doesn't. If it says "No you can't do ...
When you selected “I agree” on starting your phone, this is what you agreed to. From clause 3:
You shall not, … modify, or disable any features of, the Software …
The boot loader is part of the software, not the phone.
You are, of course, free to totally remove every scrap of Samsung’s software and write your own code for the hardware.
As I understand it (and remember this is not legal advice):
If you use software licensed under the Apache License 2.0, you get a patent license for that software from its contributors.
However, if you have a patent of your own, which is allegedly infringed by the software, and you sue the software's contributors for infringing your patent, you forfeit the ...
If software is licensed under the Apache license, then you can use that software for free.
The license states, however, that if you attempt to sue anyone, alleging that the software is infringing on intellectual property that you own, the license is automatically revoked and you cannot use the software anymore.
The part that causes this to happen is "If ...
Do we not own the software?
No, this is specifically why software is licensed and not transferred ownership.
Does the concept of "quiet enjoyment" apply here?
No, this is not a lease of real property.
What about the concept of "hidden defects"?
Does the developer acknowledge the situation and possibly resolve to fix it? Have you ...
To have standing under the law you have to be a person - individuals (among other things) are people; businesses are not. For an analogy - a football club is (probably) a legal person; a game of football isn't.
Things that are legal people include:
corporations and companies;
some supra-national organisations;...
Contrary to what is said in one of the comments, including a disclaimer or a clause in the EULA to the effect that "this program will crash buildings if used unlicensed" will not help in defending its author; more likely, it will contribute to establish their culpability. If, however, the programmer does include such functionality (the program producing ...