When is code reverse-engineered (was Re: [xwiki-dev] XECLIPSE.R.1.0.M1)

On 7/16/07, Asiri Rathnayake &lt;asiri.rathnayake(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: On 7/16/07, Vincent Massol < vincent(a)massol.net&gt; wrote: Hi Tharindu, I have done a first pass on the code review and I have a few comments: 1) You seem to have use Cloudgarden's Jigloo and unfortunately the license isn't good enough for us so we cannot use it... Here's what it says in the generated file: /** * This code was edited or generated using CloudGarden's Jigloo SWT/ Swing GUI Builder, which is free * for non-commercial use. If Jigloo is being used commercially (ie, by a corporation, company or * business for any purpose whatever) then you should purchase a license for each developer using * Jigloo. Please visit www.cloudgarden.com for details. Use of Jigloo implies acceptance of these * licensing terms. A COMMERCIAL LICENSE HAS NOT BEEN PURCHASED FOR THIS MACHINE, SO JIGLOO OR THIS * CODE CANNOT BE USED LEGALLY FOR ANY CORPORATE OR COMMERCIAL PURPOSE. */ We cannot use Jigloo because we want commercial companies using XWiki under the LGPL license. Thus we cannot commit this code. Could you find some alternative? The UI doesn't seem too complex so I should be easy to do it by hand I think. I was thinking whether it would be legal (and ethical) if we look at jigloo generated code and write our own code (without copy and paste...) ?. I really have this doubt over all open source software, what if some commercial vendor looks at XWiki code, rewrite the code, do some feature additions, remove all the licensing info and claim that it's a new product (which they own) ? After writing this mail I had second thoughts whether this was a appropriate question to ask, kind of feeling guilty... In any case, please apologize me....