On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 10:17:15AM +1100, Martin Visser wrote: <snip...> > > So my understanding of the agreements is that Microsoft are basically saying > to Novell - "You full well know that some of the code in SuSE Linux > infringes on our IP". (From elsewhere I read that this would possibly in > things like Mono, OpenOffice, Samba, etc). "But because we have this > arrangement, we will not enforce you to meet your patent obligations" (I > would presume there might also be bits of Novell's IP that Microsoft uses > but hasn't paid for to date). So Microsoft is providing protection for the > product, rather than the code. Therefore it would not automatically pass > protection on to other products with the same source code.
Which would then stop Novell from being able to distribute GPL code, as the GPL also states that you have no rights to distribute if you are paying royalties etc, on distribution. Basically, you can't use patents or other such legal matters to prevent distribution of GPL code if you are distributing it yourself. > > Of course the big problem with software patents, is that often seem to cover > the smallest algorithm, and also seem to often cover ideas that have been > obvious for ages, been implemented before, yet no one prior to the patent > holder bothered to register their idea. > > (I am not a lawyer either :-) ) > > Regards, Martin Byron Hillis -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
