Re: FAT patents. Do we need to revive non-US?
John Hasler wrote:
A work that infringes a patent that is likely to be enforced against us
cannot be distributed at all.
That sounds like a pretty subjective standard.
Who decides what's "likely?" Who is "us"?
Does "us" include billions of Chinese and Indians?
US patents have nothing to do with them. They have their own laws and
have to make their own decisions.
If their laws have nothing to do with Debian, then why shouldn't US laws
have nothing to do with Debian? (It seems like a double standard to me.)
Laws apply to places where the governments enforcing them choose to
Furthermore, does this policy include patents from countries which admit
that they have a broken patent system?*
What's that got to do with anything?
How about, because the validity of the laws in question seems to be a
criteron than race or nationality?
The only criterion for purposes of creating, maintaining,
distributing, and using software is whether the laws in question will
or are likely to be enforced against the prople creating, maintaining,
distributing, and using software. In some countries just posession of
such software could be construed a crime.
Now, simply creating software like that for one's own purposes of
study, without distributing or *using* it for other purposes is
ok, at least in the USA.
To add to your confusion, the US is not the only country with software
patents and there are important countries with other laws that can be
You have still not answered my basic question about why a broken or
local ordinance should dictate Debian policy.
I don't understand why you wouldn't understand that people don't want
$250,000.00 USD judgements against them, with court orders for them
to pay up, or have their assets, like houses, siezed and sold at
auction by the local county sherriff.
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!