On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 12:54 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > 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. ---- speculating on what patent rights Microsoft might wish to assert is something I am hardly qualified to do but if you want to indulge yourself, feel free. Your statement that this isn't going to play out well suggests a pessimistic view of sorts. It's clear that if Microsoft chooses to pursue this route, they will incur the wrath of many of their largest customers which might be why they indulged in the proxy effort through SCO. I am not a lawyer but I know that if this were about trademarks, they would lose enforceability if they knowingly allowed infringement without asserting their claims. My guess is that something similar applies to patents but more to the point, wouldn't Microsoft's board of directors be guilty of malfeasance on behalf of their stockholders if they knew that their patents were being infringed and they failed to assert their claims? I suppose the scenario ultimately plays out when Linux starts massively gaining market share on the Desktop as it has been doing in the server room. Can you say Vista resistance? Clearly their sales of Office are the first to be chipped away - but that I think the point of their License 6 efforts was to ensure their revenue stream by blurring the packaging costs in favor of seats. Craig -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
