-----Original Message-----
From: owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com]On Behalf Of Nico
Kadel-Garcia
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 12:06 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Patent license
From: "Scott Kitterman"
It seems to me that Microsoft's bad past behavior (or lack thereof) is a
bit
off topic. For example, would anyone feel better if it were Oracle or
Sun?
I would. Sun can spell "open-source", and so can Oracle. Neither of them
have the history of intellectual property theft and abuse.
I wouldn't, oh well, poor examples then.
My point I was trying to get to is that independent of Microsoft's past
behavior, the patent license is either compatible with the GPL or it isn't.
Microsoft's behaviour has no bearing on that question.
That's the one that needs to be answered and isn't going to be answered in
the next 2 weeks.
It would appear to me, IANALATEYHSMBSI (akin to YANALATEYHSMBSI
http://www.cygwin.com/acronyms/#YANALATEYHSMBSI), that it's incompatible.
Time will tell. In the mean time, MARID ouught to work on plan B.
Scott Kitterman