Re: Micros*ft deal
El jue, 21-06-2007 a las 21:40 +0200, Robert Millan escribió: I believe our silence says it all, no? If they want to donate us money for no 'carte blanche' back good, Their donations are welcome, their deals aren't. In fact, we could even lose our permission to use GPLv3 software if we did that. otherwise I don't think it's worth write a PR and help them spread their FUD, IMHO. On the contrary; the objective would be to dismiss their FUD. The basic problem is that since GPLv3 has been yet released, we are releasing de-facto GPLv3 software, in every piece licensed as GPL v2 or any later. I can be using a ig chunk of Debian as GPLv3, and nobody can dismiss this right now. -- Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Micros*ft deal
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 11:03:03AM +0200, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: El jue, 21-06-2007 a las 21:40 +0200, Robert Millan escribió: I believe our silence says it all, no? If they want to donate us money for no 'carte blanche' back good, Their donations are welcome, their deals aren't. In fact, we could even lose our permission to use GPLv3 software if we did that. otherwise I don't think it's worth write a PR and help them spread their FUD, IMHO. On the contrary; the objective would be to dismiss their FUD. The basic problem is that since GPLv3 has been yet released, we are releasing de-facto GPLv3 software, in every piece licensed as GPL v2 or any later. I can be using a ig chunk of Debian as GPLv3, and nobody can dismiss this right now. There are software in main that can be distributed under non-free licenses too. What's the problem ? Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Micros*ft deal
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007, Robert Millan wrote: Since every GNU/Linux distributor seems to be positioning with regards to possible patent deals with Microsoft, I thought we could do the same. Actually, it's totally unthinkable that a non-profit organization could do this kind of deal, in which Microsoft pays you to perform hara-kiri by losing the right to distribute GPLv3 software. This is exactly what a positioning statement would reflect: that our community model is invulnerable to this kind of threats (and also to going out of bussiness, etc). For the time being, I have no intention of issuing such a statement or supporting it. If whatever deal prevents us from distributing GPLv3 software, then let's just never enter such a deal. No need for a statement, and certainly not a statement specifically about Microsoft: IBM has far more patents. And companies with smaller but more focused patent portfolios are being far more aggressive than Microsoft at suing everyone around, so regarding patents, *they* are the immediate threat. Also, large corporations such as Microsoft are highly schizophrenic entities, and I would not want to jeopardise possible collaborations with other parts of it (such as Microsoft Research) because of a direct PR attack. It's unlikely to see it go the Sun way, but I am certain that there are people within Microsoft wishing to push free software forward, too. Regards, -- Sam. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Micros*ft deal
Hi! * Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070621 09:40]: Actually, it's totally unthinkable that a non-profit organization could do this kind of deal, in which Microsoft pays you to perform hara-kiri by losing the right to distribute GPLv3 software. This is exactly what a positioning statement would reflect: that our community model is invulnerable to this kind of threats (and also to going out of bussiness, etc). It would probably not be the worst idea to publish a position statement. I would to see some kind of statement, too. I think we should at least come up with a (general) position statement about patent (including, why we consider our position not a thread for our users). Such a statement wouldn't need to mention MS in any way, if that's wished. Yours sincerely, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Micros*ft deal
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 03:57:39PM +0200, Alexander Schmehl wrote: I would to see some kind of statement, too. How about To the best of our knowledge, Debian is free of patent encumberance. We will, however, happily accept patent indeminfications for our users, upstream developers, and derived distributions; and will be happy to offer any company that offers such an indemnification any number of copies of Debian to provide to their customers that they may desire. ? :) Cheers, aj signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Micros*ft deal
Robert Millan wrote: Hi, Since every GNU/Linux distributor seems to be positioning with regards to possible patent deals with Microsoft, I thought we could do the same. Actually, it's totally unthinkable that a non-profit organization could do this kind of deal, in which Microsoft pays you to perform hara-kiri by losing the right to distribute GPLv3 software. This is exactly what a positioning statement would reflect: that our community model is invulnerable to this kind of threats (and also to going out of bussiness, etc). It would probably not be the worst idea to publish a position statement. Regards, Joey -- If nothing changes, everything will remain the same. -- Barne's Law Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Micros*ft deal
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 06:08:16PM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote: On 6/20/07, Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Since every GNU/Linux distributor seems to be positioning with regards to possible patent deals with Microsoft, I thought we could do the same. Actually, it's totally unthinkable that a non-profit organization could do this kind of deal, in which Microsoft pays you to perform hara-kiri by losing the right to distribute GPLv3 software. This is exactly what a positioning statement would reflect: that our community model is invulnerable to this kind of threats (and also to going out of bussiness, etc). Thoughts? I believe our silence says it all, no? If they want to donate us money for no 'carte blanche' back good, otherwise I don't think it's worth write a PR and help them spread their FUD, IMHO. regards, -- stratus I read Mr. Shuttleworth statement about his opposion to joining the microsoft-covenent bandwagon. I see nothing in simply (re)stating Debian's position on the matter and (re)stating its commitment to its Free software ideals in a climate where some folks are not following the best interests of the community. Silence does not seem like a great course in this case. -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal |mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/| | `. `' Operating System| go to counter.li.org and | | `-http://www.debian.org/ |be counted! #238656 | | my keyserver: subkeys.pgp.net | my NPO: cfsg.org | |join the new debian-community.org to help Debian! | |___ Unless I ask to be CCd, assume I am subscribed ___| -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Micros*ft deal
* Robert Millan: Since every GNU/Linux distributor seems to be positioning with regards to possible patent deals with Microsoft, I thought we could do the same. The patent deals between Microsoft and Linux vendors that have been announced so far deal with issues that do not seem particularly relevant for the Debian project (except for the promise not to sue some people). If Microsoft promises not to sue us, our mirror operators, and or end users, for no compensation except a joint press release (we haven't got much more we can offer anyway), it would be very stupid to reject such a deal. Surely, it would legitimize Microsoft as a patent-owning software company, but I can't really think this is particularly relevant at this stage. The business world doesn't see them as mobsters, and neither do most people in software (not anymore). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Micros*ft deal
On to, 2007-06-21 at 15:25 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: The patent deals between Microsoft and Linux vendors that have been announced so far deal with issues that do not seem particularly relevant for the Debian project (except for the promise not to sue some people). Hey, that's an excellent idea! I'm all in favor of making a deal with Microsoft where we promise that we won't sue them for patent infringement, and they give us, say, one billion dollars, to use as we wish. Just think about it: by investing $1G in suitable ways we should be able to get around 7% net interest, or about 70 million per year. Divide that by the 1000 full DDs, we get about 70 thousand dollars per year. In other words, excluding the most expensive places like Silicon Valley, easily enough to hire 1000 full time developers. That's 1000 full time developers working on developing Debian. If each fixes just one RC bug per month, that's 12000 RC bugs per year. We'd have to start packaging everything on SourceForge to keep up with the demand for RC bugs. If Microsoft promises not to sue us, On the other hand, there's something fishy in a deal where Microsoft pays us millions for the priviledge to not sue us. -- You need fewer comments, if you choose your names carefully. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Micros*ft deal
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 06:08:16PM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote: On 6/20/07, Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Since every GNU/Linux distributor seems to be positioning with regards to possible patent deals with Microsoft, I thought we could do the same. Actually, it's totally unthinkable that a non-profit organization could do this kind of deal, in which Microsoft pays you to perform hara-kiri by losing the right to distribute GPLv3 software. This is exactly what a positioning statement would reflect: that our community model is invulnerable to this kind of threats (and also to going out of bussiness, etc). Thoughts? I believe our silence says it all, no? If they want to donate us money for no 'carte blanche' back good, Their donations are welcome, their deals aren't. In fact, we could even lose our permission to use GPLv3 software if we did that. otherwise I don't think it's worth write a PR and help them spread their FUD, IMHO. On the contrary; the objective would be to dismiss their FUD. -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Micros*ft deal
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 03:50:21AM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote: On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 06:08:16PM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote: On 6/20/07, Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Since every GNU/Linux distributor seems to be positioning with regards to possible patent deals with Microsoft, I thought we could do the same. Actually, it's totally unthinkable that a non-profit organization could do this kind of deal, in which Microsoft pays you to perform hara-kiri by losing the right to distribute GPLv3 software. This is exactly what a positioning statement would reflect: that our community model is invulnerable to this kind of threats (and also to going out of bussiness, etc). Thoughts? I believe our silence says it all, no? If they want to donate us money for no 'carte blanche' back good, otherwise I don't think it's worth write a PR and help them spread their FUD, IMHO. regards, -- stratus I read Mr. Shuttleworth statement about his opposion to joining the microsoft-covenent bandwagon. I see nothing in simply (re)stating Debian's position on the matter and (re)stating its commitment to its Free software ideals in a climate where some folks are not following the best interests of the community. Silence does not seem like a great course in this case. Rather than repeating what others have said: positioning statement would reflect: that our community model is invulnerable to this kind of threats (and also to going out of bussiness, much unlike other communities that are based on bussiness. This doesn't sound redundant does it? -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Micros*ft deal
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 03:25:32PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: If Microsoft promises not to sue us, our mirror operators, and or end users, for no compensation except a joint press release (we haven't got much more we can offer anyway), it would be very stupid to reject such a deal. A joint press release amounts to legitimation of their maffia-style attacks. This is an extremely high cost for our community. You may think it's a cost worth of paying, but please do at least show some respect for those who disagree. Surely, it would legitimize Microsoft as a patent-owning software company, but I can't really think this is particularly relevant at this stage. The business world doesn't see them as mobsters, and neither do most people in software (not anymore). What is this perspective based on? I was under the impression that they were seen as mobsters more than ever before.. -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Micros*ft deal
Hi, Since every GNU/Linux distributor seems to be positioning with regards to possible patent deals with Microsoft, I thought we could do the same. Actually, it's totally unthinkable that a non-profit organization could do this kind of deal, in which Microsoft pays you to perform hara-kiri by losing the right to distribute GPLv3 software. This is exactly what a positioning statement would reflect: that our community model is invulnerable to this kind of threats (and also to going out of bussiness, etc). Thoughts? -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Micros*ft deal
On 6/20/07, Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Since every GNU/Linux distributor seems to be positioning with regards to possible patent deals with Microsoft, I thought we could do the same. Actually, it's totally unthinkable that a non-profit organization could do this kind of deal, in which Microsoft pays you to perform hara-kiri by losing the right to distribute GPLv3 software. This is exactly what a positioning statement would reflect: that our community model is invulnerable to this kind of threats (and also to going out of bussiness, etc). Thoughts? I believe our silence says it all, no? If they want to donate us money for no 'carte blanche' back good, otherwise I don't think it's worth write a PR and help them spread their FUD, IMHO. regards, -- stratus http://stratusandtheswirl.blogspot.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
