jeffrey.knight at gmail.com
Sun Mar 20 08:41:22 EST 2005
Thanks for the clarification -- I don't want to start any flame wars; the
further explanation from you and Dennis puts it in perspective.
Dennis also pointed me to the list archives where this had been hashed out
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 08:29:16 -0500, Jonathan Pryor <jonpryor at vt.edu> wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-03-19 at 23:40 -0500, Jeffrey Knight wrote:
> > " Only Miguel or a Novell official can speak about Mono and patents. "
> > I probably I misinterpreted this: why isn't anyone free to speak about
> > Mono and patents?
> > Mono is GPL'd -- why would a "Novell official" be in a better position
> > than anyone else?
> Because we've had long, drawn-out "discussions" (flames) about patents
> in the past, and we'd rather not repeat them. *Everyone* has an opinion
> about software patents, leading to a "what color should we paint the
> barn" scenario -- lots of heat and little progress.
> Besides, if a patent lawsuit is started, who will actually be sued? J.
> Random Hacker, or Novell? As Novell is the copyright holder for most of
> Mono (all GPL'd bits need a copyright assignment, IIRC, so this includes
> mcs and other apps), they're the logical entity to sue. Plus, they have
> more money than J. Random Hacker. If anyone else is sued, they can
> raise this issue and Novell should be brought into the case.
> Consequently, it doesn't matter what other people think, since they're
> not taking most of the risks, Novell is.
> (Granted, such logic won't prevent a SCO from suing you, but nothing
> will. If you fear the SCOs of the world you won't do anything at all;
> you'll be paralyzed with fear, especially in the US where anyone can sue
> anyone else for any reason, no matter how preposterous.)
> - Jon
More information about the Mono-devel-list