Alexander Terekhov wrote:
OSI's General Counsel contemplates upcoming "disaster for open source
licensors" and brings attention to another recent case
(3:06-cv-07391-MJJ).
Is reality finally setting in?
Observe the enormous amount of “spin” applied to the current
presidential candidates and then fire up Google and look for “open
source” blogs that are actively discussing the Netbula, LLC v. Storage
Technology decision. Any parallels?
The so-called open source “community” has expended an enormous effort
during past years spouting crass propaganda concerning the “power” of
open source licensing. The biggest lie of all was the chanting of the
mantra “a license is not a contract”.
By evading this fundamental legal principle – that all license are
contracts – any cogent discussion of open source licensing principles
and possible benefits has been subverted by anti-capitalist political
ideology.
Any open source "disaster" has been openly engineered by the propaganda
folks at OSI and the FSF.
Regards,
Rjack :)
--- Whether this [act] constitutes a gratuitous license, or one for a
reasonable compensation, must, of course, depend upon the circumstances;
but the relation between the parties thereafter in respect of any suit
brought must be held to be contractual, and not an unlawful invasion of
the rights of the owner."; De Forest Radio Tel. & Tel. Co. v. United
States, 273 U.S. 236, United States Supreme Court (1927) ---
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
