Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 11:28:18AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> On Dec 9, 2003, at 09:49, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>
> >Whenever you are faced with a plausible argument for both sides, the
> >one with the more expensive lawyer wins.
>
> There is a more than plausible argument that just about everything in
> Debian violates a software patent. Debian's lawyers (us?), AFAIK, cost
> $0.
>
> So, we need to decide based on more than a plausible argument.
In order to produce software, you are implicitly required to ignore
potential patent infringement unless somebody starts enforcing the
patent. Otherwise it's impossible to do anything.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Reply to:
- References:
- Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: mru@kth.se (Måns Rullgård)
- Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu>
- Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: mru@kth.se (Måns Rullgård)
- Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: Andrew Suffield <asuffield@debian.org>
- Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>
- Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: Arnoud Engelfriet <galactus@stack.nl>
- Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>
- Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: Andrew Suffield <asuffield@debian.org>
- Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>