Re: [DotGNU]Re: Collaboration on alternatives to the US-patent-endangered APIs?

[Gopal V]

Hi Miguel ,

> Rhys, I am not the one making claims that
> `Windows.Forms has no patent
> violations', you are the one who claimed that you
> had done a careful
> study. 
...
> What I said is reflected on our FAQ: we dont believe
> that *any* of it is
> patentable.

That is a huge assumption to make, good luck if you
want to risk that. Also I hope you have done a 
risk assesment with your company lawyer. If you have 
such a document , it would also be worth seeing as
that would solve all of the problems. (but as Rhys
has said, that's not done so easily, right ?)

Also on your side , Mono is using Wine and wrapping
over it to produce Winforms -- which is more of a 
wrapper over MFC than dotgnu has. In reality that
is more of a risk , using an MFC binary level
emulation. X11 based implementations only implement
API, but Mono winforms seem  to be even more 
vulnerable in such a situation.

> You claim that you did a careful study on
> Windows.Forms and its
> applicability to the patent, and that is why its
> excluded.  I do not
> believe either you or Norbert did any careful study.

Challenging the honesty of developers is a bad way
to start co-operation. 

You could have provided a definite and polite "No" 
towards the efforts to co-operation if you don't 
want to. But please don't insult dotgnu for the 
efforts to protect dotgnu users (as well as mono 
users, as in the thread) from US E-Patents. Please
don't try to undermine the good intentions of
the effort.

Gopal

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com