On Fri, 2006-07-21 at 13:52 +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > At Thu, 20 Jul 2006 11:25:02 +0100, > Alex Hudson wrote: > > I guess you can say "RF-AND" (Royalty-free and non-discriminatory), as > > opposed to RAND, and people would figure out what you were saying. > > Royalty-free is always non-discriminatory.
That really rather depends on your point of view; if RF was always non-discriminatory we probably wouldn't be even having this discussion. If I have patents which cover standard X, and my licence is "You may implement my patents so long as you do not provide the source to your software", I think most here would consider that to be discriminatory against free software. The fact that I don't charge for that license doesn't really come into it. I agree that any requirement for royalty is probably the largest stumbling block, though. Cheers, Alex. _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
