Russel,
Thanks for your response! I'm not exactly clear on what Intel proposes
for patented software, or the implications thereof, but I imagine that
will become clear as I continue to skim the thread. OK, I went back and
reread some of the thread -- I guess they propose to give a royalty free
On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Intel can't solve those problems but it should be commended for doing
> what it can (even if it isn't doing everything that we think
> possible).
Yes. Although my one response to this was in the negative, I *do*
think it's great that Intel is trying.
Randy Kramer writes:
> 1. Use (and modification) of software can be restricted by copyright but
> might also be restricted by patent (if the software uses something which
> is patented).
Because U.S. law relating to intellectual property has been corrupted.
> Aside: I would feel cheated (mis
Stamnes, Michelle writes:
> It is not logical to say that a license that grants MORE rights than the BSD
> is not "open".
Agreed. And yet, we don't have logic to work from, we have the Open
Source Definition.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for
I've skimmed this thread, but don't know if I got the point. I'd like
to try to make a few simple statements and questions, and have somebody
tell me if I'm on the right page or not:
1. Use (and modification) of software can be restricted by copyright but
might also be restricted by patent (if t
> Finally, under the proposed license, you can use the software in Solaris or
> any other proprietary OS or in any other piece of software (in addition to
> the GPL based OS's). You just don't have a patent license; so you are no
> worse off than with the BSD license.
>
Yes, that point was made
On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Stamnes, Michelle wrote:
> Finally, under the proposed license, you can use the software in
> Solaris or any other proprietary OS or in any other piece of software
> (in addition to the GPL based OS's). You just don't have a patent
> license; so you are no worse off than wit
There seem to be a number of comments on the BSD+ Patent license we have
proposed that claim that the license is not "open" because it only licenses
a specific product; i.e., Linux.
First, this is not true. The patent license that is extended is for ANY OS
that is licensed under the GPL. It m
8 matches
Mail list logo
