gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down ..


From: amicus_curious
Subject: Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down ..
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 18:39:26 -0400


"Doug Mentohl" <address@hidden> wrote in message news:address@hidden
amicus_curious wrote:

this article .. is rather 4th hand and not a very compelling analysis ..

Said he as he totally failed to address or refute anything in the article.

"Yes, other companies have signed FAT patent licenses, both in the context of patent cross licensing agreements and other licensing arrangements."

But he really didn't say anything about these companies using GPL software. It was sort of a non-answer to the question.

'Contrary to what Microsoft may state about this not being about Linux, tying up companies that use Linux and open source in patent licensing agreements cuts to the very core of one of the things that's kept Linux and open-source alive: free distribution of the kernel and code'

'Samba maintainer Jeremy Allison pointed out in a recent blog posting by writer Glyn Moody that companies who sign up to Microsoft's licensing cannot continue to distribute their code under GPLv2'

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/06/microsoft_tomtom_patent_licensing/
--
so who are we goign to believe Jeremy Allison or a legalistic Usenet troll

Well you are going to belive what you want to belive and I will do the same. At the end of the day, it will be the judge and jury who will have to be believed regardless of what either of us think or Jeremy Allison as well. Who could sue TomTom and the others who are thought to be violating the GPL by both signing deals with Microsoft for patent use and distributing GPL code simultaneously? TomTom does not use Samba, I would think, and so Jeremy cannot sue, so who could sue and what would they assert? The only fact that anyone could glean would be that TomTom settled the suit filed by Microsoft and that there are a number of companies using GPL that are not being sued by Microsoft. What would the complaint be in such a lawsuit? That the GPL users are being harmed by Microsoft not suing a bunch of companies? That sounds a little ridiculous, don't you think?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]