Re: Sender ID, Mono and Debian
On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 05:54:40PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> Recently Debian stated[1] about Microsoft Sender ID technology, which,
> given the choosen Royalty-Free, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory
> License (RAND+Royalty-free), couldn't be distributed by Debian.
[...]
> The question is: Why Mono[2] has a different treatment, given that the
> C#/CLI standards are licensed in the same way[3]? This, IMHO, is a
> dangerous inconsistency to Debian.
>
> What do you think?
That this is muddled thinking, but you're excused because the Sender ID
statement is very brief and leaves out a number of steps.
What the long version of that statement should say is that any software
which has funny patent related restrictions *on copying* can not enter
Debian.
Patent-encumbered software is not bad. Do you think the OSRM is joking
when it claims[1] to have found 283 patents which the linux kernel may
infringe?
*All* software is at risk from software patents, not just Mono. Do you
think Microsoft's patents on C#/CLI related technologies are so specific
that they don't apply to any other language, any other VM?
Debian can't just jump anytime someone yells PATENT! in relation to a
piece of software. There are already far too many[2]. See above, it
looks to me that with real legal professionals having looked into the
matter, if any software should be booted from debian, the linux kernel
is the perfect first candidate.
Instead, let's continue to *ignore* patent claims as long as they are
not tied to our right to *copy* software.
To sum it up:
- "You can freely copy this software as long as you register for our
royalty free patent license with strings attached": BAD
- "Running this software may require a patent license from so and so":
fine, it's up to the user to decide the applicability of any patents
in his jurisdiction (hint: think outside of the USA).
[1] http://www.osriskmanagement.com/linuxpatentpaper.pdf
[2] http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2004/08/05/LinuxPatents
--
Bart.
Reply to: