Re: nomarch-1.2 - Problems with RLE patent 4,586,027
> If Debian hasn't got the balls to stand up for itself in the face of
> even a ridiculously obvious patent like RLE, we may as well all go home
> now because there's not a damned thing we can do for our users - even
> apt and GNU fileutils infringe a pair of other Microsoft patents.
> That's right, they've got patents on symlinks (a new feature added to
> Win2k) and on upgrading over the network. Oh we've got years of prior
> art for either, but I can promise you that people were using RLE
> compression back as far as 1956.
>
> This project needs a backbone.
I agree with you. If you move every software covered by a patent to
non-free, It will get faster to move the enterely tree to non-free.
For example, see this patent:
http://l2.espacenet.com/dips/viewer?PN=WO0193020&CY=ep&LG=en&DB=EPD
| A system and method of software system upgrade simulation utilizing a
| collection of newly developed software modules or new version of
| existing software modules, information regarding the collection of
| software modules, and a specific rules language for supporting system
| managers. The system produces a dependency-conflict-free system
| configuration file thereby making available the option to system mangers
| to perform a conflict-free software system upgrade process.
It seems to cover apt-get, urpmi and others. I don't think a lot of
people want to see apt-get moved in non-free.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: