On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 8:21 PM, A. Mani <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Pranesh Prakash <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > F/RAND + No Payment != Royalty-Free != 'Open' > No, it isn't. To quote from Stallman's pithy epigram, 'free' is not 'free beer'. Similarly, Royalty Free is not Open. I am a little surprised by the clause actually, even after reading Venky's backgrounder. Tell me, if the standard originator is ready to part with the specs for free, how come it wants to keep a hold on it still? Surely there is no value left in hanging on to a non-remunerative bit of 'intellectual capital'? Why can't we insist on complete 'openness' in an open standard? Do we fear that some MNCs will run away from India? They may, of course, if they feel suicidal. -- Vickram http://communicall.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
