I don't believe even Stallman wants patent laws overturned.
That's the biggest whopper I've seen in a while. Which is amazing within itself. Do you know how ridiculous you look standing up for that creep?
Posted on 03/08/2006 5:49:56 AM PST by Halfmanhalfamazing
So what if someone in the government approved it, I already pointed out Bill Clinton removed almost all export controls on software, yet here you are licking his boots.
Not exactly an authoritative source. Take it from a Sun executive in charge of this, Tom Goguen:
Q: "Some vendors and end users have another concern – that Solaris will “fork” ... What can you say about the “forking” issue, and the potential for confusion"
A: "By making Sun’s commercial distribution of Solaris free, we think we’re going to mitigate the forking in terms of our primary market."
Hmmm, why would this Sun executive want to mitigate something that's not possible? Software under the MPL is forkable, and section 2.1(b) of the CDDL (the one you referenced) does not differ significantly from the same section in the MPL that it's based on.
Admit you're being hypocritical, or show me something better than what one Linux guy thinks of a license that was barely just released at the time.
You do realize that changing the name has nothing to do with technology, only trademark. Nevermind, you probably don't.
... in major part at the request of the American commercial software companies that were being strangled by them.
Tell the whole story.
haha!
The classic "non" response. A Roasted Turkey trademark.
Well, that's a relief. Surely the thugs in Beijing would never dare to infringe US patents.
I take it you're a fan of gun control too.
And by Communist sympathisers like John Ashcroft.
Who said it was not possible? No one, proving how desperate you've become. I said you could face a patent suitfor forking, which remains absolutely correct. And of course why communists prefer GPL, and want to see our patent laws overturned.
Know of any other time Ashcroft sided with the ACLU?
I new you'd weasel out in that way. Wrong, you have no proof. The license specifically grants patent license to the software, and explicitly allows that software to be modified and redistributed (which allows a fork). Show me a provision in the license that rescinds the patent license in the case of a fork and I'll believe you. Tell me why you can fork MPL and not CDDL and I may believe you if you're rational.
Here, I'll be nice and give you a link to a Sun page showing their intent behind the CDDL, including the bit about how they wanted the patent issue to be easier for people (not harder, as you seem to think).
And of course why communists prefer GPL, and want to see our patent laws overturned.
Beside the point. And I don't believe even Stallman wants patent laws overturned. But I would also like to see a reversal of the judicial activism that allowed software to be patented in the first place.
Wow, I didn't know Ashcroft was on the side of the people on that one. He just got more respect from me. Kerry being against the people isn't surprising, as Gore was too (remember Clipper?).
I remember it well. Quite useful for exposing the Bushitler crowd on Slashdot to reality.
I already showed you, in the license itself, which clearly indicates patent protections only exist for "original software", and a fork is certainly NOT original software.
As for Stallman, of course he opposes patents, and is very outspoken against them. How could any reasonable person think otherwise? Answer: they can't, since fighting them is one of his core philosophies. Quote from his website "Every software patent is harmful".
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/fighting-software-patents.html
Either you already knew this and are still a Stallman stooge, or you don't even understand the actual motives of his movement you continually and so bitterly defend.
Your interpretation of the license is pretty damn whacked and completely contrary to the intent. "Original Software" is what Sun wrote, even if it consists of 30% of a forked product. It is still covered.
Again, MPL licensed software is subject to forking. The CDDL is the MPL with some minor edits. Show me where the changes in the CDDL prohibit forking.
No, he opposes
Friggin' learn how to read. Damn, my seven year old shows more comprehension.
Heh, you might just want to give it up. My words stand on their own, and you certainly can't out spin the spinner.
Once the spin gets too fast, facts just bounce off. Just open the NY Times.
I don't believe even Stallman wants patent laws overturned.
That's the biggest whopper I've seen in a while. Which is amazing within itself. Do you know how ridiculous you look standing up for that creep?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.