On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 11:07:52AM +0200, drago01 wrote: > > The promise makes quite sure to tell you you have no right[1], but you can > > infringe that they won't sue *you*[2]. > > > > [1] => means you can't do it with GPL > > It explicitly grant this right. What you're explicitly told s that you won't be sued if you do so without the right. And you have no right! Further down (in the FAQ, outside the promise) you're told you need to get a RAND or RAND-Z license to have the rights. Who ever got these, could s/he please publish them? No one I know who has asked ever got it from Microsoft, even under promises. > > [2] => means you can't do it with GPL3 > > > > If you want to do it with GPL'ed software, you need to obtain a RAND or RAND-Z > > patent license. Who ever got it, could s/he please publish it? > > > > Microsoft promised to give it to a company that asked for it in Portugal, and > > they never fulfilled (even after insistence). > > > > I know of several other people who have asked for it and never got it. > > > > You need to stop believing in Santa. > > We already had the OIN protection and this is additional safety. You seem to fail to grasp the concept that without weapons there's no war. You think that by having weapons you're defended? That's rich... it only means you can probably fight back (depending on the infringement), not that you win or are defended. > But I am not a lawyer so I leave the judgment to them. You don't need a lawyer to distinguish between a) having a right or b) not being sued if you infringe Rui -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
