> From: [...] Daniel Vainsencher
> I like Colins answer - if the implementation is based on new ideas, it
> obviously isn't copied, so no real risk.

- Will the *entire* implementation be based on new ideas, or will even one
small part (say, one method) not be?  That small part *may* be sufficient to
trigger a suit from an organisation that does not necessarily know what it
is talking about.  We may have cut the risk of this by as much as a factor
of ten - probably not more than that if it could be claimed that there is
*any* derivative code in the 'clean' system.  Is this sufficient?  Or is the
risk of any organisation dragging a developer through the courts still too
high, as they have money and (s)he does not?

- Will a piecemeal rewriting be sufficient, or will it all have to be done
in a 'big-bang' fashion?  Remember the quote: 'He's had the same broom for
thirty years.  It's had six new heads, five new handles, but it's the same
broom."  A piecemeal rewrite of Squeak is [perceived as] the same Squeak,
subject to the same attacks.

Daniel, I'd love to share your optimism about a rewritten system.
Regrettably, after a period dealing with IP issues as a company founder, I
don't.  Admittedly, my experience is with English IP law; but American IP
law seems less clear-cut to me, and the society far more litiginous.

		- Peter