Re: Red Hat on patent FUD

[Snit]

RonB stated in post op.uq5om9adf7zs3d@localhost.localdomain on 3/21/09 12:05
PM:

> On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 04:38:19 -0500, Roy Schestowitz
> <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote:
> 
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> ____/ Doug Mentohl on Tuesday 17 March 2009 18:49 : \____
>> 
>>> 'the purpose of this portfolio is defensive .. because of the threats of
>>> companies that are hostile to FOSS and that have amassed large
>>> stockpiles of overbroad patents'
>>> 
>>> 'Although there have been some recent questions about one of our patent
>>> applications relating to the AMQP specification, they appear to
>>> originate in an attempt to spread FUD. There¹s no reasonable, objective
>>> basis for controversy'
>>> 
>>> 
http://www.press.redhat.com/2009/03/17/discouraging-software-patent-lawsuits>>>
/
>> 
>> It's not really FUD.
>> 
>> The former head of the FFII is sure to publicise information which
>> suggests that Red Hat is not or was not serious about ending software
>> patents. People should not let them off the hook so easily.
> 
> So... are you against any commercial sales of Linux? Red Hat has stated
> (over and over) that their patents are for defensive purposes. The company
> depends on open source development to survive. Do you think that, at some
> point, they'll say "Okay, we can take it from here, no more open
> development... it's all ours now" Have they done ANYTHING to indicate that
> this is the direction they will be going in the future?
> 
> Some people seem to be willing to cut off their noses to spite their face.
> I just don't get it.

Well, you do it when I talk about bettering the choices on desktop Linux and
you argue against me just to appear "cool" to your COLA buddies.

You are not really as anti-choice as you claim, are you?


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]