On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Stephen Beller <sbel...@nhds.com> wrote:
> Fred, > > This is encouraging and I wish you great success! > > Two questions: > > 1. How do you define "hybrid vendors" and distinguish them from FOSS > vendors? Anyone who makes money by supporting FOSS AND by selling proprietary health software. > > 2. What roll, if any, do you see for companies having patented > methodologies? That is largely uncharted territory, but in general I would like to treat that in a similar fashion to hybrid vendors. They will be included and welcomed, while their slight bias against our core values will be explicitly labelled. In my experience the FOSS community does not like to treated condescendingly or tricked. If a vendor disagrees with some of our values, but still wants to work with us in those areas that they agree with us, we should make that fall over easy for them to do. I would think the same would hold true to patents. Do not try to trick us into implementing something that you are going to later try and charge us for, use standard FOSS patent licensing techniques and we should be just fine. > > > Thanks, > Steve Beller > > > > -- Fred Trotter http://www.fredtrotter.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
