BSD License w/ Software patents, was: Sendmail vs. Postfix vs. ?

[Sean Jewett <sean@rimboy.com>]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, L. V. Lammert wrote:

> On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Casey Boone wrote:
> 
> > and that is fine, however why bring software patents into the mix as an
> > arguement AGAINST the gpl when it has the same bearing on BSD licensed
> > software?
> >
> Because software patents do not have a bearing on BSD licensed s/w. (At
> least until some shyster lawyers try to make a phantom case.)

Lee, 
	You directly contradict your statement here with your followup 
email, quoted below.


At 06:11 PM 9/6/2004 -0500, you wrote:

> > Lee, please refrain from characterizing BSD-style licenses as somehow
> > "more" free or "completely" free than another or any or all other
> > licenses.

> Lee Wrote:
> Mike,
>
> You're getting into way more detail than I am equipped to discuss. The
> original question was why Sendmail is better than Postfix, and I replied
> with the facts as I have them. The debate as to why is beyond this
> forum, as well as my legal knowlege and interests.


Software patents have as much bearing on BSD licensed software as they do
GPL as they do under any other terms (ie, Microsoft's license
agreement(s)).  Just because it's licensed under the BSD license does not
mean it gets an automatic pass when it comes to software patents.  You
seem to believe that it does and others (including myself) are asking,
upon which leg do you stand on in this arguement?  In otherwords, tell us
how you think BSD licensed software escapes software patent issues.  We'd
all like to know.

While I'll agree that there are merits to the BSD license and using it
where it makes sense, arguing that it somehow keeps the user / licenser
protected from software patents or even intellectual property issues is a
red herring at best and a complete misunderstanding of the BSD license(s)
at worst.

It is the crux of the arguement of those against the free software
movement (GPL, BSD, etc) that they ignore intellectual property (SCO v
Linux and ATT v BSD) in that they violate patents (or copyrights).  These
arguements apply to any and all software whose creator could run afoul of
potential copyright or software patents.  I don't see how any license 
could offer that sort of escape route.  

Which is why we're asking, on what basis do you make your statements?

Sean...

--
The punk rock will get you if the government don't get you first.
	--Old 97's
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
KG4NRC  http://www.rimboy.com  Your source for the crap you know you need.



-
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
"unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.