[Mono-list] Mono and Patents....
Mon, 15 Mar 2004 16:23:32 -0500
As an interested observer, and in fact someone who's actually *using*
Mono and always considered the patent issue to be a red herring, and
actually *did* believe Miguel that everything was okay, this thread has
left me a lot more worried than when I started.
I read the FAQ and found it rather vague, but I trusted in Miguel by
reputation that the holes in the FAQ actually had good answers that just
weren't listed there. But when Andy had the temerity to actually ask
those questions (and probably a lot more intelligently than I could) he
got nothing but flames - actually, *some* people gave the beginnings of
decent answers, but the "authoritative source", Miguel, didn't... which
suggests that the people who gave good answers may not actually be
representative of the Mono project's official position.
Alex Combas wrote:
> Miguel is also a _very_ respected community leader. I
> cant even begin to tell you how childish your remarks
> about his community building skills seem.
I was personally shocked at how poor his community building skills are
given his reputation as a great community builder. Maybe he's just
having a bad day (probably true, I've read lots of excellent and
intelligent email from him in the past), but that doesn't excuse you
defending him when he's clearly in the wrong on this issue.
Frankly, I'd expect a "great community builder" to give people a little
more of the benefit of the doubt, and I'd expect anyone with a tenth of
Miguel's open source experience to know that it's perfectly possible for
a patent license to be GPL-incompatible (as Andy so carefully explained
in his last email, which, flame-like as it was, was STILL far more full
of content than anything by Miguel on this thread).
> Instead of flaming him (which is _exactly_ what you
> just did) perhaps you could have started by saying:
> "Thanks for the info. I really appreciate your time Mr
> de Icaza, but Im _still_ not convinced. Is there
> anything more you could show me?". Eventually the
> magic bullet you are so desperately seeking would be
Miguel was flaming Andy before Andy flamed him back. And Andy's flame
had content and valid points and valid questions, where Miguels just
repeated over and over "Patents and copyrights are different!" which we
all, including Andy, clearly knew from the start.
> Unfortunately for you, flames have a funny way of
> burning down bridges, so I really doubt you will be
> getting more information from _anyone_ here.
I hope not, because I still want to use Mono, and I really hope that
*someone* comes up with an answer to Andy's valid question, which is:
"Where's the authoritative statement which says that Microsoft will
continue to license the ECMA technologies *royalty-free*, as opposed to
just RAND, and how legally binding is that statement?"
This is information that *clearly* should be in the FAQ, and isn't, and
every time someone mentions it, they're just pointed back to the FAQ,
which is usually where they're coming *from* in the first place.
Again, I have plenty of respect for Miguel based on stuff I've read
before, and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he's
just having a bad day today, or just fed up with this issue, but I still
think that in this thread he's in the wrong. Just because he's Miguel,
doesn't mean he's always right. (Isn't one of the cornerstones of
democracy the right, nay duty, to question our leaders?)
Stuart Ballard, Senior Web Developer
(215) 283-2300, ext. 126