Argh... I know I said I wouldn't, but this one really needs to have some scale 
applied.

On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 12:43:28AM +0200, drago01 wrote:
> > They just "promised" (and their word is worthless in this regard) not to 
> > sue you.
> 
> So what about the patents owned by redhat?
> http://www.redhat.com/legal/patent_policy.html
> It's also just "promise".

And it suffers from some of the "promise" and "not license grant" problems as 
well.

But I should point out a few things which must be duly noted in order to 
understand
the scale difference.

        (1) Red Hat does NOT have a history of attacking Free Software

        (2) Red Hat does HAVE a history of promoting Free Software with deeds 
and words

        (3) Red Hat opposes software patents:
            «Red Hat has consistently taken the position that software patents 
generally
             impede innovation in software development and that software 
patents are
             inconsistent with open source/free software.» -- First phrase in 
Red Hat's
             statement of position on software patents.

            «A relatively small number of very large companies have amassed 
large numbers
             of software patents. We believe such massive software patent 
portfolios are
             ripe for misuse because of the questionable nature of many 
software patents
             generally and because of the high cost of patent litigation.»

        (4) Red Hat fully acknowledges the most important Free Software 
Licenses:
            «Approved License means any of the following licenses: GNU General 
Public
             License v2.0 and v3.0; GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1 and 
v3.0, IBM
             Public License v1.0; Common Public License v1.0; Q Public License 
v1.0; Open
             Software License v3.0; and any open source license granted by Red 
Hat.
             Red Hat may add to this list in its sole discretion by publication 
on this page.

        (5) "any claim" (aka well defined) vs "necessary claims" (aka smoke 
screen)

As such, even though there are problems, Red Hat is a "good citizen", whilst 
Microsoft is a
several times repeating offender.

Who would you give the benefit of doubt, and whom would you demand proof from?

Rui

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Reply via email to