Hi all, >You should also note that Ian's been very good about keeping Uprizer and the Freenet Project as very, very separate entities. If you have a question about the terms of Intel's investment in Uprizer, I'd suggest you call or email them. I'd be greatly surprised if they wanted to reveal their contractual obligations to you, a third party, but you're welcome to try.
Well Mr. Bad I think that it is important to minimize corporate influence in an opensource project which advocates freedom. I find it interesting that freenet is advocating free speech while Intel is building a company for the Freenet project leader. Once the code is in the hands of Uprizer/Intel does it no longer advocate free speech and is it no longer opensource? Will Intel "contractual obligation" additions to the code be made public? Maybe you don't recall Intel's history of putting unique identifiers into its PIII processors but I do! :) Intel is one of the big boys in worldwide companies and they play by entirely different rules than you would expect: threats, bribes and lies are all commonly used by them to hold their market share where they want it. Don't believe me then go talk to some of the semiconductor manufacturers in Taiwan who wanted to make AMD boards :) best regards, Jamie Morken _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
