On 11/14/06, Anders Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wednesday 15 November 2006 02:58, Sunny wrote:
> want that there are no patent problems in SUSE, but then why in first
> place they signed such a clauses? And ... "to protect our customers
> from being sued for something which does not exists" sounds plain ...
> unconvincing.
Why does Red Hat do it then? Have you read their indemnification plan lately?
They promise their customers that if they are sued for code shipped from Red
Hat, they will assist in the law suit (I believe the wording they use is
'step into their shoes'). I don't really see a significant difference here,
they also give their customers a guarantee that they won't have to fork out
legal fees
If you have potential (large) customers or partners who tell you they worry
about these things, what should you do? Just say 'hey, we're sure there's no
problem, no part of this code is infringing'? Do you think many people will
bet their lawyer's fees on that, when they hear FUD from all over that there
are problems?
Blame the people who spread the FUD in the first place instead
Yes, and there is the difference - RedHat does this by themselves - we
sell you software - we'll help you if there is a problem - plain and
fair.
Novell - on the other hand - says: We sign an agreement with the
people who started this FUD, so they will not go after you. If they
[Novell] were so sure they do not have patent problems, why just not
promise the same as RH to their customers? And still besides this
question, actually what for Novell are paid for by MS??? What does MS
receive, except the weakening of the community. Divide and conqueror!
--
Svetoslav Milenov (Sunny)
Even the most advanced equipment in the hands of the ignorant is just
a pile of scrap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
