Right. In short, there is no way to "divide the market" when you're talking about ALv2 licensing. Everybody has equal access to very permissively-licensed software.
It is not a worry. Move along, please. Cheers, -g On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 23:51, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote: > The problem here is that Rob and Sam and other well-known employees are being > addressed as IBM employees here and even called to account for their > employer's behavior and intentions by some of the participants. I suggest > that the best way to deal with those requests is to meet them with silence > and those of us who know better should stop asking those questions. > > Furthermore, the competition laws that apply to Rob and Sam as IBM employees > and their agreements with their employer are not waived by their having a > different hat here. They can't get out of it, just like a priest (or > parishioner) can't avoid causing scandal by misbehaving in plain clothes. > They can operate as individuals but they must also honor the requirements on > their conduct that are a consequence of their employment. > > However, this is not a secret conversation and it is not about arrangements > to exclude third parties (except the absent elephant that shall not be named, > and I don't see how that can happen under a transparent Alv2 setup anyhow -- > au contraire). Furthermore, it is not clear to me that anything that happens > here can create a "division of markets." > > I think this can be more grounded by talking about specific actions that are > called for in finalizing the proposal and in anticipating the essential work > for taking over the OpenOffice.org code base, related artifacts, and making > them available under ALv2, whether or not we ever make a distribution that is > called Apache OpenOffice.org. > > I have too many more thoughts, but it is time to take the trash to the curb > and then feed the cats. So you are spared for now [;<). > > - Dennis > > -----Original Message----- > From: Norbert Thiebaud [mailto:nthieb...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 20:31 > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Legal concern: Are we getting to close ot a "division of > markets" conversation? > > [ ... ] > > And these law apply to non-for-profit organization ? The Red-Cross and United > Way cannot agree to 'Divide Territories' ? They have by law the obligation to > 'compete' for the potential recipient of their charity ? > > Isn't Apache a non-for-profit ? > > If I understand the 'Apache Way', I'd say you are wearing a 'Corporate' hat > in this email, not your 'Apache member' hat > > Norbert > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
