[gentoo-dev] Software patents

[gentoo-dev] Software patents

[twofourtysix]

I applaud all those people on the Planet who are posting
anti-software-patent banners in their blogs. It's good to see yet
another major software project taking a stance.

Are these people prepared to back up their views by removing from the
tree all those ebuilds for software made by companies who make heavy
use of software patents? That would be far more effective, and may
even encourage a few mainstream tech news sources to stop ignoring the
issue. I can think of quite a few software-patent friendly companies
who are currently gaining significant good PR from being 'supported'
by Gentoo.

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Alec Warner]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I don't really see removing software from the tree because it's made by
a company that uses software patents as a choice that improves the user
experience with Gentoo.  It doesn't make Gentoo more useful for anyone.
 Just as software thats not open source is in the tree, so should
software that is pushed by companies that some people may not support
also be kept in the tree.  Not using software from companies that you do
not support is as always an end-user choice, if users demand and
implement a system to make that choice ( ACCEPT_LICENSE glep ), then
that is their perogative(sp?).

- -Ajec

twofourtysix wrote:
> I applaud all those people on the Planet who are posting
> anti-software-patent banners in their blogs. It's good to see yet
> another major software project taking a stance.
> 
> Are these people prepared to back up their views by removing from the
> tree all those ebuilds for software made by companies who make heavy
> use of software patents? That would be far more effective, and may
> even encourage a few mainstream tech news sources to stop ignoring the
> issue. I can think of quite a few software-patent friendly companies
> who are currently gaining significant good PR from being 'supported'
> by Gentoo.
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
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=1wRF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Brian Jackson]

If someone removes something that belongs to me, software patents or not, I'll
be asking for removal of (at the very least) their cvs access. If not, I'll be
asking for their total removal from the project. You can have all the views you
want on the world. I do. This is a technical project, not your own personal soap
boxes.

--Iggy

twofourtysix wrote:
> I applaud all those people on the Planet who are posting
> anti-software-patent banners in their blogs. It's good to see yet
> another major software project taking a stance.
> 
> Are these people prepared to back up their views by removing from the
> tree all those ebuilds for software made by companies who make heavy
> use of software patents? That would be far more effective, and may
> even encourage a few mainstream tech news sources to stop ignoring the
> issue. I can think of quite a few software-patent friendly companies
> who are currently gaining significant good PR from being 'supported'
> by Gentoo.
> 
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Anthony Gorecki]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 597 bytes --]

On Monday, July 04, 2005 9:15 pm, Brian Jackson wrote:
> If someone removes something that belongs to me, software patents or not,
> I'll be asking for removal of (at the very least) their cvs access.

I believe that the original poster's intent was to post a request for 
comments, although it was admittedly wrapped in a political ideal.


> You can have all
> the views you want on the world. I do. This is a technical project, not
> your own personal soap boxes.

I am eternally thankful that RMS isn't here to comment on that :)


-- 
Anthony Gorecki
Ectro-Linux Foundation

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[twofourtysix]

On 05/07/05, Anthony Gorecki <agorecki@ectrolinux.com> wrote:
> On Monday, July 04, 2005 9:15 pm, Brian Jackson wrote:
> > If someone removes something that belongs to me, software patents or not,
> > I'll be asking for removal of (at the very least) their cvs access.
> 
> I believe that the original poster's intent was to post a request for
> comments, although it was admittedly wrapped in a political ideal.

Mostly, I was hoping that all those people who seem more than happy to
advocate something with *words* would be prepared to back them up with
*actions*. I think it's a shame that Gentoo is prepared to encourage
people to pester their politicians whilst simultaneously refusing to
spend a few minutes practising what it preaches.

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Stuart Longland]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1453 bytes --]

twofourtysix wrote:
> I applaud all those people on the Planet who are posting
> anti-software-patent banners in their blogs. It's good to see yet
> another major software project taking a stance.

Heh, notice mine's not amongst them... but it will be.  I'm carefully
constructing my post now. :-)

	"Better to keep your mouth shut, and people think you're a fool,
	than to open your mouth and remove all doubt"
		-- Confucious

> Are these people prepared to back up their views by removing from the
> tree all those ebuilds for software made by companies who make heavy
> use of software patents?

Why stop there?  Why not extend it to hardware manufacturers that make
heavy use of patents?

Good luck finding a decent video card for that lovely desktop of yours. :-)

In all seriousness... perhaps maybe allowing users to mask packages that
have a particular licence?  I'm not sure there, but that would be one
solution.  I personally don't think it's necessary to go as far as
removing the ebuilds though... after all, it's not the ebuild that's
covered under the patent. :-)

-- 
 ____                   _             Stuart Longland (a.k.a Redhatter)
/  _ \   ___    ___  __| |__  __   __ Gentoo Linux/MIPS Cobalt and Docs
- (_) \ /   \  ;   \(__   __)/  \ /  \                        Developer
 \    //  O _| / /\ \  | |  | /\ | /\ |
 /   / \   /__| /  \ \ | |  | \/ | \/ |
(___/   \____/|_;  |_| \_/   \__/ \__/ http://dev.gentoo.org/~redhatter

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 256 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Mike Frysinger]

On Monday 04 July 2005 11:07 pm, twofourtysix wrote:
> Are these people prepared to back up their views by removing from the
> tree all those ebuilds for software made by companies who make heavy
> use of software patents?

not a chance
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Robert Paskowitz]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Are you personally prepared to practice what you preach? You had better
start by uninstalling the linux kernel...

twofourtysix wrote:
> On 05/07/05, Anthony Gorecki <agorecki@ectrolinux.com> wrote:
> 
>>On Monday, July 04, 2005 9:15 pm, Brian Jackson wrote:
>>
>>>If someone removes something that belongs to me, software patents or not,
>>>I'll be asking for removal of (at the very least) their cvs access.
>>
>>I believe that the original poster's intent was to post a request for
>>comments, although it was admittedly wrapped in a political ideal.
> 
> 
> Mostly, I was hoping that all those people who seem more than happy to
> advocate something with *words* would be prepared to back them up with
> *actions*. I think it's a shame that Gentoo is prepared to encourage
> people to pester their politicians whilst simultaneously refusing to
> spend a few minutes practising what it preaches.
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCyhiFZwjIiODIZ4oRApg7AJ0REZgnKyvX461SHQ9tvVEbdjVw3ACdGzH4
T6aTDE6Iq48gABUF2YFr/xo=
=IAEc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Anthony Gorecki]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 681 bytes --]

On Monday, July 04, 2005 10:14 pm, Stuart Longland wrote:
> Why stop there?  Why not extend it to hardware manufacturers that make
> heavy use of patents?
>
> Good luck finding a decent video card for that lovely desktop of yours. :-)

I'm still holding out hope that the open sourced video card project (of which 
I can't recall the name) will have some degree of success. It'll likely be 
some time before they'll even be able to release a (conservative) moderately 
powerful graphics card.

The likelyhood of them competing with nVidia is fairly low, but I suppose that 
the same was once said of AMD versus Intel.


-- 
Anthony Gorecki
Ectro-Linux Foundation

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[twofourtysix]

On 05/07/05, Robert Paskowitz <r2d2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Are you personally prepared to practice what you preach? You had better
> start by uninstalling the linux kernel...

I personally am not going around encouraging people to take a stance
upon an issue whilst simultaneously helping out the very people
against whom one is supposed to be standing. I applaud Gentoo's
efforts in displaying the banners, but so long as Gentoo continues to
assist and advertise for the very companies who are pushing for
software patents, I do not see it as a particularly credible protest.
Would it not be better to avoid becoming involved in the issue
entirely if one is not prepared to back up a cute little banner with
actual actions?

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Robert Paskowitz]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> > I personally am not going around encouraging people to take a stance
> upon an issue whilst simultaneously helping out the very people
> against whom one is supposed to be standing. 

You have encouraged gentoo to remove patent-encoumbered software from
portage. I'd like to see you personally work with only software that
does not contain any patented work.


> I applaud Gentoo's
> efforts in displaying the banners, but so long as Gentoo continues to
> assist and advertise for the very companies who are pushing for
> software patents, I do not see it as a particularly credible protest.
> Would it not be better to avoid becoming involved in the issue
> entirely if one is not prepared to back up a cute little banner with
> actual actions?
> 
Gentoo has made no such efforts. Some developers have taken it upon
themselves to make their feelings heard. For those that don't
instinctively realise that planet.gentoo.org agregates stuff writen by
individuals, the following notice is at the bottom of the page:

Views expressed in the content shown above do not necessarily represent
the views of Gentoo Linux or the Gentoo Foundation.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCyh30ZwjIiODIZ4oRAv2EAJ9DugRsH1zapl6QajrCC2KQvLN/dwCeOAkr
uQE0tM55cDpuE+RS7ldBlRw=
=6Kg0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Alec Warner]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

not being privvy to -core ( where I hear this was started and
subsequently moved to -dev ) I can only assume you didn't find what you
wanted on -core and are trolling for a decent response here.

I am certain there are people who agree with you on a idiological
standpoint, and perhaps even agree with an outright ban on material that
originates from a patent producing company ( IBM anyone? :) ).  However,
no one said that we lived in an ideal world.  I can't imagine anytime in
the near future where this idea is remotely feasable ( see r2d2's point
about the kernel itself ).

In short, there are probably enough of arguments and responses to this
matter on -core to write a research paper, this will probably never
happen in the near future, Happy 4th of July.

- -Ajec

twofourtysix wrote:

> Mostly, I was hoping that all those people who seem more than happy to
> advocate something with *words* would be prepared to back them up with
> *actions*. I think it's a shame that Gentoo is prepared to encourage
> people to pester their politicians whilst simultaneously refusing to
> spend a few minutes practising what it preaches.
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
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=5tP8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[twofourtysix]

On 05/07/05, Robert Paskowitz <r2d2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> You have encouraged gentoo to remove patent-encoumbered software from
> portage. I'd like to see you personally work with only software that
> does not contain any patented work.

No, I have encouraged Gentoo to remove software written by companies
who are strongly behind software patents. Big difference. It's so easy
to get software patents in the USA currently that it's likely that
every single thing in the tree is covered by some bogus software
patent. However, in most cases, these patents are not held by the same
people who are making the software.

> > I applaud Gentoo's
> > efforts in displaying the banners, but so long as Gentoo continues to
> > assist and advertise for the very companies who are pushing for
> > software patents, I do not see it as a particularly credible protest.
> > Would it not be better to avoid becoming involved in the issue
> > entirely if one is not prepared to back up a cute little banner with
> > actual actions?
> >
> Gentoo has made no such efforts. Some developers have taken it upon
> themselves to make their feelings heard. For those that don't
> instinctively realise that planet.gentoo.org agregates stuff writen by
> individuals, the following notice is at the bottom of the page:
> 
> Views expressed in the content shown above do not necessarily represent
> the views of Gentoo Linux or the Gentoo Foundation.

Oh come on. The planet is a service provided by Gentoo, with content
provided by Gentoo developers, which is hosted on a Gentoo domain,
presumably using Gentoo hardware. A cute disclaimer doesn't change its
status.

If you seriously think that content provided via the planet is not
representative of Gentoo views, I invite you to try posting something
really offensive to it and see how long it lasts. If it remains
uncensored, I'll accept that Gentoo as an organisation has no
influence over the content. Otherwise, by moderating the contents,
Gentoo is implicitly accepting responsibility for the items which
remain.

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[twofourtysix]

On 05/07/05, Alec Warner <warnera6@egr.msu.edu> wrote:
> not being privvy to -core ( where I hear this was started and
> subsequently moved to -dev ) I can only assume you didn't find what you
> wanted on -core and are trolling for a decent response here.

Not being privy to -core either, I am wondering about the apparently
hypocritical stance being taken on this issue.

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[M. Edward (Ed) Borasky]

Not to mention all the software written in Java ... and other things in
the Portage tree like VMWare ... skype ... acroread ...

Really ... you can take those out of the Portage tree. I can -- and
often do -- download them directly and install them. On Gentoo, CentOS,
Debian, Fedora and Windows. It won't hurt me in the slightest if they're
removed from Portage.

twofourtysix wrote:

>I applaud all those people on the Planet who are posting
>anti-software-patent banners in their blogs. It's good to see yet
>another major software project taking a stance.
>
>Are these people prepared to back up their views by removing from the
>tree all those ebuilds for software made by companies who make heavy
>use of software patents? That would be far more effective, and may
>even encourage a few mainstream tech news sources to stop ignoring the
>issue. I can think of quite a few software-patent friendly companies
>who are currently gaining significant good PR from being 'supported'
>by Gentoo.
>
>  
>
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Jon Portnoy]

On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:59:24AM +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> uncensored, I'll accept that Gentoo as an organisation has no
> influence over the content. Otherwise, by moderating the contents,
> Gentoo is implicitly accepting responsibility for the items which
> remain.
> 

So the fact that the forums are moderated means that anything anybody 
ever posts to the forums anywhere is _the_ Gentoo opinion?

-- 
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Jon Portnoy]

On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 07:01:34AM +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> On 05/07/05, Alec Warner <warnera6@egr.msu.edu> wrote:
> > not being privvy to -core ( where I hear this was started and
> > subsequently moved to -dev ) I can only assume you didn't find what you
> > wanted on -core and are trolling for a decent response here.
> 
> Not being privy to -core either, I am wondering about the apparently
> hypocritical stance being taken on this issue.

I am wondering why we have anonymous trolls on this mailing list.

-- 
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[twofourtysix]

On 05/07/05, Jon Portnoy <avenj@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:59:24AM +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> > uncensored, I'll accept that Gentoo as an organisation has no
> > influence over the content. Otherwise, by moderating the contents,
> > Gentoo is implicitly accepting responsibility for the items which
> > remain.
> 
> So the fact that the forums are moderated means that anything anybody
> ever posts to the forums anywhere is _the_ Gentoo opinion?

No, it means that Gentoo is accepting responsibility for carrying the
posts. Isn't that why threads advocating certain kinds of clearly
illegal activity (software 'piracy' and hate speech being the most
common, but also threads which contain people's personal information
posted without permission) are deleted or locked?

Remember, unlike the planet, the forums don't advertise their content
as being written "by Gentoo developers".

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Georgi Georgiev]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 667 bytes --]

maillog: 04/07/2005-21:38:01(-0700): Anthony Gorecki types
> On Monday, July 04, 2005 9:15 pm, Brian Jackson wrote:
> > If someone removes something that belongs to me, software patents or not,
> > I'll be asking for removal of (at the very least) their cvs access.
> 
> I believe that the original poster's intent was to post a request for 
> comments, although it was admittedly wrapped in a political ideal.

Uh, I thought it was a troll.

-- 
\    Georgi Georgiev   \  Old age is too high a price to pay for       \
 /    chutz@gg3.net     / maturity.                                     /
\   +81(90)2877-8845   \                                               \

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Donnie Berkholz]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

twofourtysix wrote:
> On 05/07/05, Jon Portnoy <avenj@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>>On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:59:24AM +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
>>
>>>uncensored, I'll accept that Gentoo as an organisation has no
>>>influence over the content. Otherwise, by moderating the contents,
>>>Gentoo is implicitly accepting responsibility for the items which
>>>remain.
>>
>>So the fact that the forums are moderated means that anything anybody
>>ever posts to the forums anywhere is _the_ Gentoo opinion?
> 
> 
> No, it means that Gentoo is accepting responsibility for carrying the
> posts. Isn't that why threads advocating certain kinds of clearly
> illegal activity (software 'piracy' and hate speech being the most
> common, but also threads which contain people's personal information
> posted without permission) are deleted or locked?
> 
> Remember, unlike the planet, the forums don't advertise their content
> as being written "by Gentoo developers".

Gentoo plays the role of ISP in this case, and in general isn't liable
for things said on its forums etc.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCyi5GXVaO67S1rtsRAtflAJ9UrpAJWNXw34s5LnlFdY/w0CbDpQCgh2QZ
qwca1AKu4VPTFHgxoeAUoBY=
=tAVa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Robert Paskowitz]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


twofourtysix wrote:

>> On 05/07/05, Robert Paskowitz <r2d2@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>
>
>>>>You have encouraged gentoo to remove patent-encoumbered software from
>>>>portage. I'd like to see you personally work with only software that
>>>>does not contain any patented work.
>
>>
>>
>> No, I have encouraged Gentoo to remove software written by companies
>> who are strongly behind software patents. Big difference. It's so easy
>> to get software patents in the USA currently that it's likely that
>> every single thing in the tree is covered by some bogus software
>> patent. However, in most cases, these patents are not held by the same
>> people who are making the software.
>>


The linux kernel includes selinux code (2.6 branch). Please see the
following statement of assurance:
http://www.securecomputing.com/pdf/Statement_of_Assurance.pdf . IBM and
RedHat also have numerous patents covering the kernel. If IBM isn't a
company strongly in favour of patents, I don't know who is.

>>
>
>>>>>>I applaud Gentoo's
>>>>>>efforts in displaying the banners, but so long as Gentoo continues to
>>>>>>assist and advertise for the very companies who are pushing for
>>>>>>software patents, I do not see it as a particularly credible protest.
>>>>>>Would it not be better to avoid becoming involved in the issue
>>>>>>entirely if one is not prepared to back up a cute little banner with
>>>>>>actual actions?
>>>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>Gentoo has made no such efforts. Some developers have taken it upon
>>>>themselves to make their feelings heard. For those that don't
>>>>instinctively realise that planet.gentoo.org agregates stuff writen by
>>>>individuals, the following notice is at the bottom of the page:
>>>>
>>>>Views expressed in the content shown above do not necessarily represent
>>>>the views of Gentoo Linux or the Gentoo Foundation.
>
>>
>>
>> Oh come on. The planet is a service provided by Gentoo, with content
>> provided by Gentoo developers, which is hosted on a Gentoo domain,
>> presumably using Gentoo hardware. A cute disclaimer doesn't change its
>> status.
>>
>> If you seriously think that content provided via the planet is not
>> representative of Gentoo views, I invite you to try posting something
>> really offensive to it and see how long it lasts. If it remains
>> uncensored, I'll accept that Gentoo as an organisation has no
>> influence over the content. Otherwise, by moderating the contents,
>> Gentoo is implicitly accepting responsibility for the items which
>> remain.
>>


Views on the planet of views of the developers. Plain and simple. So
long as they relate in some way to gentoo, they are welcome. If they are
not welcome there, they *are* welcome at universe.gentoo.org. It
probably won't surprise you to know that that is hosted on the same
machine as planet.gentoo.org. Of course, something flat-out inflammatory
isn't likely to survive long, but that's related more to the Etiquette
policy
(http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=3;chap=2),
which _could_ probably do with another section regarding
planet/universe(hint hint devrel).


Furthermore, the idea of 'practising what you preach' would suggest that
Gentoo not file patents over things it produces. It seems all too
easy(and convinient) to blur the actual topic of discussion.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCyi9GZwjIiODIZ4oRAljXAJwLxucVzSheSqqgqbynmVW6ketmxwCfQxIJ
gdmwQXRhEptROqb9beDDWC0=
=JRYR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Anthony Gorecki]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 241 bytes --]

On Monday, July 04, 2005 11:19 pm, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> I am wondering why we have anonymous trolls on this mailing list.

This is a public mailing list that doesn't use message filters.


-- 
Anthony Gorecki
Ectro-Linux Foundation

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Anthony Gorecki]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 464 bytes --]

On Monday, July 04, 2005 10:13 pm, twofourtysix wrote:
> Mostly, I was hoping that all those people who seem more than happy to
> advocate something with *words* would be prepared to back them up with
> *actions*.

I advocate that more rapid stabilization of the tree would be very useful for 
the users; unfortunately, the (wo)man-power doesn't exist, even if the desire 
does. It's just not that simple.


-- 
Anthony Gorecki
Ectro-Linux Foundation

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Stuart Longland]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1481 bytes --]

Anthony Gorecki wrote:
> On Monday, July 04, 2005 10:14 pm, Stuart Longland wrote:
> 
>>Why stop there?  Why not extend it to hardware manufacturers that make
>>heavy use of patents?
>>
>>Good luck finding a decent video card for that lovely desktop of yours. :-)
> 
> I'm still holding out hope that the open sourced video card project (of which 
> I can't recall the name) will have some degree of success. It'll likely be 
> some time before they'll even be able to release a (conservative) moderately 
> powerful graphics card.
> 
> The likelyhood of them competing with nVidia is fairly low, but I suppose that 
> the same was once said of AMD versus Intel.

I think I recall that one... Tech Source if I'm not mistaken...
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=109831011607347&w=2

I too would love to see a decent open-source friendly graphic card.  ATI
have been pretty good with their r200-based cards... although the
driver's still got quite a bit to be desired.  I think a completely open
player in the field might just be what the industry needs.

But that's offtopic for this thread :-)

-- 
 ____                   _             Stuart Longland (a.k.a Redhatter)
/  _ \   ___    ___  __| |__  __   __ Gentoo Linux/MIPS Cobalt and Docs
- (_) \ /   \  ;   \(__   __)/  \ /  \                        Developer
 \    //  O _| / /\ \  | |  | /\ | /\ |
 /   / \   /__| /  \ \ | |  | \/ | \/ |
(___/   \____/|_;  |_| \_/   \__/ \__/ http://dev.gentoo.org/~redhatter

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 256 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Kumba]

twofourtysix wrote:
> 
> Not being privy to -core either, I am wondering about the apparently
> hypocritical stance being taken on this issue.

I'm not sure if you caught the last few mails, but as stated, opinions posted on 
the Planet/Blog/Bathroom Stall are simply _opinions_ of individual entities. 
They are _not_ opinions of the entire organization, no matter how many opinions 
for or against there may be.

As such, the following events can be expected to occur:
	1) Software will _not_ be removed from the tree simply because
	   it is made by a company who just so happens to favour
	   software patents.

	2) This pointless debate will eventually die, because if it doesn't
	   I'm going to start quoting select excerpts from Vogon Poetry.

	3) If the Vogon Poetry fails, I'll start reading excerpts from
	   Grunthos the Flatulent's "Ode To A Small Lump Of Green Putty
	   I Found In My Armpit One Midsummer Morning".

	4) If that happens to fail, which it shouldn't, I'll be forced to
	   depths I haven't visited in quite a long time: Poetry from
	   Paul Neil Milne Johnstone.

	5) Everyone will become happy, and help Save the Pikachus.


--Kumba

-- 
Gentoo/MIPS Team Lead
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees

"Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: small hands 
do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are elsewhere."  --Elrond
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Ioannis Aslanidis]

On 7/5/05, Kumba <kumba@gentoo.org> wrote:
>         2) This pointless debate will eventually die, because if it doesn't
>            I'm going to start quoting select excerpts from Vogon Poetry.
> 
>         3) If the Vogon Poetry fails, I'll start reading excerpts from
>            Grunthos the Flatulent's "Ode To A Small Lump Of Green Putty
>            I Found In My Armpit One Midsummer Morning".

Can we have a demo?

-- 
Ioannis Aslanidis

<deathwing00[at]gentoo.org> 0xB9B11F4E
<deathwing00[at]forums.gentoo.org> 0xC2539DA3
<aioannis[at]tinet.org> 0xF202D067
<dwcommander[at]users.sourceforge.net>

Hellenic Gentoo GNU/Linux project manager (http://hellenicgentoo.sf.net)
FIRECOPS++ project manager (http://firecops.sf.net)
Digger Realoaded (http://digger-reloaded.sf.net)
Gentoo Forums Global Moderator (http://forums.gentoo.org)

Computer Engineering student at Universitat Rovira i Virgili

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Stuart Longland]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1394 bytes --]

twofourtysix wrote:
> On 05/07/05, Robert Paskowitz <r2d2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>>You have encouraged gentoo to remove patent-encoumbered software from
>>portage. I'd like to see you personally work with only software that
>>does not contain any patented work.
> 
> No, I have encouraged Gentoo to remove software written by companies
> who are strongly behind software patents. Big difference. It's so easy
> to get software patents in the USA currently that it's likely that
> every single thing in the tree is covered by some bogus software
> patent. However, in most cases, these patents are not held by the same
> people who are making the software.

Actually, you'd be suprised.  _Quite a few_ companies, quite actively
involved in promoting Linux, also, have quite a few software patents,
that directly affect things like the Linux kernel.  Some of these
companies own quite big chunks of the Linux kernel source.

So your suggestion is neither practical, nor does it help the patent
case in any way shape or form.
-- 
 ____                   _             Stuart Longland (a.k.a Redhatter)
/  _ \   ___    ___  __| |__  __   __ Gentoo Linux/MIPS Cobalt and Docs
- (_) \ /   \  ;   \(__   __)/  \ /  \                        Developer
 \    //  O _| / /\ \  | |  | /\ | /\ |
 /   / \   /__| /  \ \ | |  | \/ | \/ |
(___/   \____/|_;  |_| \_/   \__/ \__/ http://dev.gentoo.org/~redhatter

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 256 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Patrick Lauer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1059 bytes --]

On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 06:13 +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> Mostly, I was hoping that all those people who seem more than happy to
> advocate something with *words* would be prepared to back them up with
> *actions*. I think it's a shame that Gentoo is prepared to encourage
> people to pester their politicians whilst simultaneously refusing to
> spend a few minutes practising what it preaches.

Ok ... let's remove all software that might violate a european patent.

As some people stated, the kernel will go. As far as I know glibc and
gcc will be removed too.
All programs using sockets could potentially be an abuse, so no network
for you.
No progress bars.
Etc. etc.

I think skel.ebuild will be among the few survivors - 30.000 patents
don't leave much space for non-violating software, especially once you
realize that many of those patents are for trivial ideas (which are
unpatentable)

Or in other words:
Stop using "Free" Software since it's theft ;-)

wkr,
Patrick
-- 
Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[twofourtysix]

On 05/07/05, Patrick Lauer <patrick@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 06:13 +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> > Mostly, I was hoping that all those people who seem more than happy to
> > advocate something with *words* would be prepared to back them up with
> > *actions*. I think it's a shame that Gentoo is prepared to encourage
> > people to pester their politicians whilst simultaneously refusing to
> > spend a few minutes practising what it preaches.
> 
> Ok ... let's remove all software that might violate a european patent.

Who was talking about removing ebuilds for software just because that
software violates a patent? I certainly wasn't... Strange that I'm
being accused of trolling when I'm not the one with the straw man
arguments.

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Jon Portnoy]

On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 11:59:26PM -0700, Anthony Gorecki wrote:
> On Monday, July 04, 2005 11:19 pm, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> > I am wondering why we have anonymous trolls on this mailing list.
> 
> This is a public mailing list that doesn't use message filters.
> 

I am aware of this, however generally we don't have anonymous folks 
coming out of the woodwork advocating removal of huge chunks of the 
Portage tree for their soapbox cause 8)

-- 
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1657 bytes --]

On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 10:09 +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> On 05/07/05, Patrick Lauer <patrick@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 06:13 +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> > > Mostly, I was hoping that all those people who seem more than happy to
> > > advocate something with *words* would be prepared to back them up with
> > > *actions*. I think it's a shame that Gentoo is prepared to encourage
> > > people to pester their politicians whilst simultaneously refusing to
> > > spend a few minutes practising what it preaches.
> > 
> > Ok ... let's remove all software that might violate a european patent.
> 
> Who was talking about removing ebuilds for software just because that
> software violates a patent? I certainly wasn't... Strange that I'm
> being accused of trolling when I'm not the one with the straw man
> arguments.

Strange that you still have not given your true identity after it being
pointed out.

Strange that some people cannot see that some of us just love working on
Gentoo, and do not want it to become yet another Political debacle.

Strange that the same people cannot fight their own battle, but need to
do it under the cover of some group.

Strange that the same people only wake up now.

Strange that some people cannot realise that others might have a
different point of view, and way of doing things.

--

-core was humorous, but I really do not see why we need to start it all
over again due to some nameless person that is too much of a coward to
post as himself.


Thanks.

-- 
Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 311 bytes --]

On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 15:14 +1000, Stuart Longland wrote:
> Good luck finding a decent video card for that lovely desktop of yours. :-)

Who needs video cards? My old VT-100 A4 terminal works just fine.

./Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[M. Edward (Ed) Borasky]

Of course not -- Grunthos the Flatulent was the inventor of vaporware

<ducking>

Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:

>On 7/5/05, Kumba <kumba@gentoo.org> wrote:
>  
>
>>        2) This pointless debate will eventually die, because if it doesn't
>>           I'm going to start quoting select excerpts from Vogon Poetry.
>>
>>        3) If the Vogon Poetry fails, I'll start reading excerpts from
>>           Grunthos the Flatulent's "Ode To A Small Lump Of Green Putty
>>           I Found In My Armpit One Midsummer Morning".
>>    
>>
>
>Can we have a demo?
>
>  
>
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Software patents

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1425 bytes --]

On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 04:07 +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> Are these people prepared to back up their views by removing from the
> tree all those ebuilds for software made by companies who make heavy
> use of software patents? That would be far more effective, and may
> even encourage a few mainstream tech news sources to stop ignoring the
> issue. I can think of quite a few software-patent friendly companies
> who are currently gaining significant good PR from being 'supported'
> by Gentoo.

I can tell you one thing.  If anyone removes a package that *I* maintain
just because of software patents, then there will be hell to pay.

I could give a damn about this issue, but removing choice from our
users, especially without contacting the maintainer of the package, is
grounds for disciplinary action in my eyes.  Some of our users don't
care about patents one way or another.  Why should we have a vocal group
out there forcing their position on another?  Maybe we should start
giving back all of our donations from AMD and NVidia.  After all, they
have lots of patents.

This is really starting to get out of hand.

Don't bother responding to my post, as I'm adding a procmail rule for
this as we speak.  It has nothing to do with Gentoo development, and
doesn't belong on *this* list.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]