Bryan J. Smith wrote: > The one that comes with OpenOffice.org? Never assume they are "all the > same." ;-)
This is getting a bit ridiculous. Surely you know how to surf the Web? Look at http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/lgpl_license.html . *That* version of the LGPL begins GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2.1, February 1999 (The master copy of this license lives on the GNU website[link].) Copyright (C) 1991, 1999 Free Software Foundation, Inc. 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed. This is a copyrighted document. Sun does not get to tweak it according to their preferences. > By your own definition, the only "real LGPL OpenOffice.org" is the one that > comes with *0* MS Office document support at all. Because it has been > "tainted" by Sun's cross-license with Microsoft for almost 3 years now. Again, *if* Sun really need a patent license from Microsoft in order to distribute OO.o, they don't get to distribute it under the LGPL. Read section 11 of the LGPL, as referred to by the URL mentioned above. Within the vast number of Microsoft patents covered by the Sun-MS cross-license there may or may not be a patent that could be construed to apply to OO.o, but so far Microsoft has not got around to pointing out to us that that patent exists. Once they do, Sun's right to distribute OO.o under the LGPL goes straight out the window, no matter whether they have a license from Microsoft or not. They can still distribute OO.o under another license -- they own the copyright -- but without a patent license from Microsoft that *also* covers any redistribution done by people who receive OO.o from Sun (such as Novell, Joe Blow's Software Emporium, or myself), no LGPL distribution of OO.o for Sun. > The point is we don't have even that on the _existing_ MS Office support in > OpenOffice.org! What I said. We seem to agree that trying to remove OO.o from circulation in this manner would be a bad move for Microsoft -- both from the legal (anti-trust) and PR points of view. This is not an optimal situation in any sense, but it's the one we appear to be stuck with for the time being. In any case, as I said I happen to believe that it is better to say »come out and fight if you have an issue« than to pay Danegeld the way Novell did. This would at least bring the much-vaunted »Microsoft IP« out into the open, rather than let clowns like Ballmer and McBride claim that something they own is somewhere in Linux. They won't say what, they won't say where, but please believe them anyway. (Anyway it is pretty safe to assume that Windows infringes just as many patents as Linux does, so who's to throw the first stone?) > Um, did you like ... um ... miss the whole reason why this started? > (hint, it starts with the response to the LPI-Novell announcement) The problem with the Novell-Microsoft deal is not the putative »fork« of OO.o by Novell, which I think is a silly concept. What I consider problematic with respect to OO.o is what I explained in the second half of my previous message (which you declined to say anything about in your reply), namely the fact that Novell is apparently going to waste serious money on an OpenXML importer/exporter for OO.o which is unlikely to work right and will only give OpenXML exposure that it doesn't deserve. Well, it's their money (and Microsoft's), so they can do with it what they want, but that doesn't mean I have to like it :^) It will make extra work for those of us who want to convince their customers that ODF is the way to go as far as office document formats are concerned, and now Novell is partly to blame for this. There are various other issues to do with this which are probably best debated elsewhere by others. Anselm (This is my personal opinion and not that of Linup Front GmbH.) -- Anselm Lingnau ... Linup Front GmbH ... Linux-, Open-Source- & Netz-Schulungen Linup Front GmbH, Postfach 100121, 64201 Darmstadt, Germany [EMAIL PROTECTED], +49(0)6151-9067-103, Fax -299, www.linupfront.de _______________________________________________ lpi-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss
