--- Begin Message ---
Subject: |
Re: Are Microsoft’s patent lawyers really this dumb? |
Date: |
Sun, 08 Jul 2007 21:16:11 +1200 |
User-agent: |
KNode/0.10.4 |
Kurt Häusler wrote:
> I am a bit worried myself as I used to work for a company writing open
> source linux drivers (but not in the kernel or any distros) implementing
> patented protocols and algorithms with permission, under the gpl2 (or any
> later version), just trying to do the right thing, currently I and a
> couple of others are still distributing them (and won't be suing anyone
> for using it!). I think the patents have since been sold.
Is the software that you are distributing covered by patents? If so, who
owns the patents?
> Who knows what the legal consequences are, it might be a good idea to
> stop distributing them, which seems somewhat counter to the goals of
> software freedom to me.
If you don't have the right to distribute the software, then that isn't a
fault of GPL.
> On the other hand, I like the idea of protecting the users (and other
> coders) from patent lawsuits so updating the gpl to version 3 seems
> tempting too but is it my right to do so?
Who has copyright to the software? AFAIK, you can put whatever licence on
the software that you create.
IANAL
HTH
Peter
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Subject: |
confirm 2498427b8d1f72eb41054375c670459941bebac4 |
If you reply to this message, keeping the Subject: header intact,
Mailman will discard the held message. Do this if the message is
spam. If you reply to this message and include an Approved: header
with the list password in it, the message will be approved for posting
to the list. The Approved: header can also appear in the first line
of the body of the reply.
--- End Message ---