On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 11:34, Craig White wrote: > > >---- > > >and likewise, samba developers took a position today > > > > > >http://news.samba.org/announcements/team_to_novell/ > > > > > >Craig > > > > Knee-jerk reaction by me would have been to demand that samba and cifs be > > removed from their distribution, but I see it didn't quite come to that, > > so its just so much hot air. Unfortunately... > ---- > they really can't do that. If it is demonstrated that this deal does > indeed violate GPL license and thus disqualifies Novell from legally > distributing GPL licensed software, it won't go unnoticed. > > Interestingly enough, this event probably gives rise to the best > argument in favor of GPL v3 than all other events. This isn't going to play out well. There's almost certainly something in Microsoft's huge patent portfolio that is included in samba/cifs and required to make it work. I don't see how samba developers could win a battle like that. In fact I've expected exactly that scenario for years and don't see any possible mesh with the GPL unless an agreement like Novell's also permits free redistribution with the patent protection included for any subsequent recipients. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
