From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Sep 10 12:52:45 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.lariat.org (lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ED3414A14 for ; Fri, 10 Sep 1999 12:52:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by lariat.lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA24491; Fri, 10 Sep 1999 13:52:37 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.19990910134716.047b9ae0@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 13:52:32 -0600 To: Jonathan Lemon From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Market share and platform support Cc: chat@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <19990910135455.60884@right.PCS> References: <4.2.0.58.19990909220642.04737670@localhost> <4.2.0.58.19990909220642.04737670@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 01:54 PM 9/10/99 -0500, Jonathan Lemon wrote: >> It wouldn't have to allow it. All WC would need to do is assert its legal > > right to its employees' work, and it would own code in the tree. And > > could license it however it wanted. > >And the code would then be ripped out and re-implemented by the community >at large. As has happened in the past, as well. Hopefully. But what about the employees, such as Jordan and Bill, who would be caught betwixt and between? And the vendors of other distributions, who might literally be required to pull their products until the code was reimplemented? It's best to avoid such potential problems, even if they're unlikely, by legally distancing the project from the vendor of any one distribution. Did you know that Walnut Creek already claims an interest in the NAME "FreeBSD?" This should set off some alarm bells right there. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message