[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: new-maintainer vs patents.



On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 08:47:33AM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 12:03:56PM +0200, Dariush Pietrzak wrote:
> > Hello,
> >  I've been asked to provide the list of patents that my package
> > may/may not be possibly infriging on.
> >  As you can imagine this task is way beyond my capabilities, 
> > so what should one do with this?

> That's not so beyond: you should be shure that the package you are building
> is compliant to our DFSG and that is not violating any patent or
> copyright. That mean you should inspect any file in the source.

> > Are all package maintainers required to do this?

> We have to (of course we do our best).

> > Is there some policy about which patents do we ignore and which do we
> > respect?

> We do not ignore any patent.

That's not true.  What we don't ignore are cease-and-desist letters
informing us that we are infringing, or clear indications that a patent
is being actively enforced against others in the community.  Software
patents are inherently broken, and we're better off pretending they
don't exist at all in the absence of active enforcement.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgpKbHuFCOrHZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: