Here are some of my ideas for Fedora 8 and Fedora 9

[Steve Searle]

Around 06:51pm on Sunday, July 08, 2007 (UK time), Les scrawled:

> On Sun, 2007-07-08 at 17:34 +0100, Steve Searle wrote:
> > Around 05:28pm on Sunday, July 08, 2007 (UK time), Les Mikesell scrawled:
> > 
> > > Which still leaves open the question of how many times you have to pay 
> > > to license the same patent for the same device, or whether you can 
> > > rearrange the bits in one licensed program?
> > 
> > Never!  As a user you do not buy a licence for the patent - you would
> > only do that if you were going to manufacturei (code)  and distribute
> > something that uses the patented process.  As a user you get a licence
> > to run the software (and maybe do other things with it, e.g. the GNU
> > licence).
> > 
> So, under this stricture, the folks who race cars, modifying the engine
> by changing the valve train, exhaust, modify the carburator or injection
> system add superchargers and do other things to boost performance are
> patent violators?

<lots of similar examples slnipped>

> And if it is OK to modify and engine, or a car or even a radio, then why
> not a computer program?  Is software hacking more illegal than hardware
> hacking?  And is computer hardware and software hacking subject to
> strictures not imposed on other hardware in our possession?

I was talking about someone who takes i something containing a patented
item or concept, and gives away or sells mutltiple copies of it.  Thats
why I used the word "distribute".

> A person who uses the Microsoft C compiler to create a new OS is a
> patent violator?

No but a person who took Microsoft's C compiler source, and used it as
the basis of another application would be a patent violator if Microsoft
had a patent on any of that code.  However in real life they would be
breaking the copyright on the code.

> Are derivative patents then not valid?  For instance, the frontwheel
> drive was originally developed by the Cord in the US.  Are then all
> users of frontwheel drive subject to patents held by the Cord or the
> companies that inherited the Cord patents and records?  Superchargers
> were first on Dusenbergs.  Does that mean all superchargers have to pay
> a royalty to the Dusenbergs?  I suspect they would like to hear that.

I don't know, but in any case I assume those patents would have expired
by now.

Btw, I do not believe software patents are a good idea, and I would love
the govenments that impose them to revoke them, or the courts to strike
them dowm.  But unless that happens, I do not expect Red Hat to put
themselves at risk by breaking the law, now matter how much that law is
an ass.

Steve

-- 
 
 Play Champions - my free football predictions game at:
 	http://www.stevesearle.com/champs/about.html

 18:53:35 up 12 days, 22:33,  3 users,  load average: 0.02, 0.03, 0.04
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20070708/f88338d7/attachment-0001.sig>