Consequences of the AmigaOS 3.1 source code "leak", one year after?

[OlafS3]

You may remember that just about a year ago a file "amiga os source code 3.1.tar.bz2" popped up on a web site, was linked to, copied, and the contents even wound up on GitHub for a couple of days. This event was widely publicized, on Twitter, on personal blogs, and it even made the news.

That file would contain pretty much all the AmigaOS 3.1 source code, and plenty of other material which used to be available to Commodore developers back in 1994. It's safe to say that the contents of the archive are now very widely distributed, just not necessarily available to the general public.

Back then there was speculation as to who made the data available, where the data came from, and which consequences the availability would have.

It's been a year now, and I'm curious. What did the availability of the source code make possible?

(Careful: there could be legal strings attached to answering this question, so you might consider your options when posting answers here)

 I do not know if anyone looked inside, I assume some for pure curiosity  I stayed away and propably most others too. It is funny how much noise was created around 20 years old sources, you could think future of mankind depends on defending the sources. So answer nothing changed by it. If anyone ever looked inside to get some tips how to do something or simply to see how it was done would be stupid to post it anywhere. You could also ask if someone has the intention to rob someone and expect a honest answer :-)

[OlafS3]

In my opinion, the cat is out of the bag - AmigaOS 3.1 is to be considered open source, whether one like it or not. The sources are out there, all you need to do is ask. It is merely the legal status that is unclear in the draconian parts of the world, the vast majority of people on this planet live in countries where the concept of "copyright" is not a reality. Why we in "the west" inflict our society with such regressive nonsense is beyond me, I suppose it is our love for bureaucracy and regulations.

 not entirely true... ancient china killed everybody that tried to bring silkworms outside china or how porzellan is created

[OlafS3]

@Thomas   Would that not mean you could be hit legally even if you would have agreements with Cloanto and/or Hyperion?  That would mean that Aros Rom Replacements are the only legal safe way to use?  I know that you prefer to use 3.1 as base f.e. for Vampire/standalone devices but would your preferred way not be very risky for any commercial vendor?

[OlafS3]

It is not at all legally safe for anyone who worked on any original AmigaOS to work with AROS.

 Yes who did?  Me not  I do not know anyone who worked with AmigaOS and now with Aros. Reimplementation without using original sources or looking in those just based on behavior is legal.

[OlafS3]

@vxm  You amiga guys should do more productive things than discussing legal issues, expecially if noone really knows the situaton and is attorney. Clean-room implementations are legal, even big companies with certainly lots of good attorneys had to accept that.  If now over the years someone has contributed who looked at the leaked sources or had any access to it is pure speculation and it would be impossible to proof. At least Aros is the only chance to have something legal on 68k including the roms.  Even though I do not really believe that anyone would be sued, even when using original roms from a illegal source simply because the small market would not be worth the money needed.