Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:13:10 -0500 From: Mike Hauber <mchauber@gmx.net> To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org, jan.husar@skosi.org Subject: Re: BSD folks position on GPL, Novell, IBM, SCO, and MS... Message-ID: <200611281713.11849.mchauber@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <541b7a870611281221h3da42c90ld5d7198138cc9973@mail.gmail.com> References: <200611250942.38410.mchauber@gmx.net> <200611281415.17352.mchauber@gmx.net> <541b7a870611281221h3da42c90ld5d7198138cc9973@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 28 November 2006 15:21, Jan Husar proclaimed: > On 11/28/06, Mike Hauber <mchauber@gmx.net> wrote: > > On Tuesday 28 November 2006 07:08, Jan Husar proclaimed: > > > On 11/28/06, Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav <des@des.no> wrote: > > > > Mike Hauber <mchauber@gmx.net> writes: > > > > > I was just wondering what the general consensus was on the GPL, > > > > > Linux in general, SCOs lawsuit, Sun's open sourcing, IBMs > > > > > contributions to Linux, Novell's contributions, Novell's deal with > > > > > MS and how this really affects SuSe (there's a lot of hype on that > > > > > and I literally don't know what to believe at this point). > > > > > > > > Why should we care? > > > > > > > > The SCO lawsuits are doubly irrelevant: firstly because SCO is not > > > > going to win, secondly because BSD is immune by virtue of the 1994 > > > > settlement with USL. > > > > I don't think the USL settlement matters to SCO. After all, Linux is > > immune by virtue of the GPL (in addition to SCOs claims being > > fraudulent), but that didn't stop SCO from making fools of themselves.= =20 > > It's not Darl and company specifically that I'm worried about. It's > > other companies that can come along and pull the same stunts. How long > > would it take before prospective customers get weary of the idea of open > > source as a whole if litigation claims (fraudulent as they may be) > > continue? > > Well, GPL v2 isn't the security as it was before, when you counts > software patents. > That's why there is this "extremic" proposal for gpl version3, or > better say some people found it extremic. If you look at US there is > lot of extremic stuff going around, e.g. > new companies (patent trolls) which have only reason to exist to > create patents and sue everybody. > > > > > As for the Novell-MS deal, I don't see how it affects BSD at all. > > > > > > You are right, there is no direct affect on BSD however software > > > patents is in issue no matter if it's GPL or BSD mostly in United > > > States, in EU we are still fighting the patent problematics. > > > > > > Today is voting in ITRE (Information, Technology, Research and Energy) > > > committee within European Parliament about IPRED (Intelectual Property > > > Rights Enforcment Directive) which basicly means, criminalization of > > > abusing of patents, trademarks and copyright (e.g. sentece to jail, > > > freeze of accounts and so on) > > > > This was pretty much my concern as far as OSS goes. If SCO actually > > succeeded with their claims (which I know they won't), or if other SCOs > > come along, I don't think the only target would be the GPL. I see pate= nt > > issues becoming a real problem not just for the GPL side of things but > > the BSDs as well (my stance, of course, is that it shouldn't because > > patents lately have been blindly awarded and seemingly requested for the > > purpose of fraudulent lawsuits). If companies are scrambling for paten= ts > > in order to bring litigation or to protect themselves from litigation v= ia > > counter-suits, I doubt that when the fingers start pointing, the GPLd or > > BSDd code would be excluded... In fact, I tend to think they would be a > > preferred target just because it's open source, and we are by far the > > biggest threat that proprietary companies have. > > Patents is problem for propietary, non-propietary, freeware or > opensource e.g. all the software out there. > > > I see this basically as a threat to everyone, not just the few it's > > starting out with. That's why I asked, and I hadn't really heard much = at > > all from the BSD side of the aisle. > > Yes, the BSD community is kinda quiet also in Europe, I found that > really negative. > > > What if Sun pulls a SCO with their Java? If IBM pulls a SCO with their > > contributions? If Novell pulls a SCO with their contributions? I would > > like to think that their intentions are honest, but after SCO, and then > > MSs very weird deal with Novell, who knows? (and by the way, is IBM > > working with the BSD community as well? I hadn't read anything on that, > > and would be interested to know more if they are). > > This is just a speculation and really lame one ;/ > > > Although my preference is the BSD license, I'm very much a fan of OSS, > > whether it be licensed under the BSD or GPL, and I'm just concerned abo= ut > > whether or not this could escalate into a trend against OS code in > > general. > > > > Appreciate your inputs. Thanks, > > > > Mike > > Current situation of the patents in EU or better say in Europe. > > 2005 - European Parliament rejected computer impemented invetitions > directive (which means for 4 years the same or similliar directive > can't come to vote) > 2006 - European Parliament adopted a new directive EPLA (European > Patent Litigation Agreement), which basicly means EPO (European Patent > Office, which is outisde the democratic control of EU) will have their > own courts and judges for the patent problematics and nobody can't > tell them what to do, even if the EP (European Parliament) rejected > CII (Computer Implemented Invetitions) > 2006 - IPRED2, criminalization of patent, trademark and copyright abuse > 2007 - Community Patent, backdoor for software patents and other nasty > stuff (such as dna, nano, drug, research patents and so on) > > > As you can see there are lot of problems around adopting patent > "protection", right now the situation is bad, but can be worse. EPO is > granting software patents even if they aren't aplicable in Europe, > after EPLA will come to it's function or Community Patent based on > London/Munich patent agreement we will have really similliar situation > like the United States have now. > > Hows the patent problematics and law is in United states I have just > conclusion and information from news paper. Is there someone dealing > with it in US? > > Jan Whoa. You seem to be far more legally inclined than I, so I'm not even goi= ng=20 to pretend to know anything specific as far as what actions are being taken= =20 by .gov here in the States. However, I do know that there are patents=20 popping up that the OSS communites are growing more and more concerned abou= t. =20 One example: (link may wrap): http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=3DPTO1&Sect2=3DHITOFF&d=3D= PALL&p=3D1&u=3D%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=3D1&f=3DG&l=3D50&s1=3D7,14= 0,028.PN.&OS=3DPN/7,140,028&RS=3DPN/7,140,028 I provide the link, but I couldn't tell you much about the language of the= =20 patent itself, except to reiterate whats already been said. This is a pate= nt=20 for compiling code to run on different operating systems... If that really= =20 is the case, then I don't think that it's just the GCC at risk. There should be laws about claiming things like this. There is nothing uni= que=20 about it, and most developers kits have something at least too similar for = MS=20 to say, "This is our idea, and we would like to protect it." If it's uniqu= e=20 to them, then fine. But if it's something that has been used by most=20 developers out there, it available to the public to use at will, it's metho= ds=20 are commonly known, then the patent in no way, shape, or form should be=20 issued. In fact, I believe that companies who do this should have to pay=20 fines for even attempting it. Mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200611281713.11849.mchauber>