Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.dougwise.org!aioe.org!feeder.news-service.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.004 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:: [': 0.03; 'package,': 0.03; 'xml,': 0.05; 'c++,': 0.07; 'framework.': 0.07; 'python': 0.07; 'demonstrates': 0.09; 'frameworks.': 0.09; 'gpl': 0.09; 'recipients.': 0.09; 'relies': 0.09; 'steve,': 0.09; 'examples': 0.12; 'am,': 0.14; 'received:74.125.82.44': 0.14; 'received:mail-ww0-f44.google.com': 0.14; 'wrote:': 0.14; '(including,': 0.16; '>so,': 0.16; 'comparison.': 0.16; 'defence': 0.16; "microsoft's": 0.16; 'mono,': 0.16; 'multimedia,': 0.16; 'subject:versus': 0.16; 'sue': 0.16; 'wielding': 0.16; 'argument': 0.16; 'subject:] ': 0.16; 'html,': 0.19; 'compatible': 0.20; '(or': 0.22; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.22; 'science.': 0.22; 'thu,': 0.22; 'restrict': 0.23; 'runs': 0.24; 'example': 0.24; '.net': 0.25; 'later': 0.26; 'proprietary': 0.26; 'url:mailman': 0.27; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.28; 'looks': 0.28; 'concern': 0.29; 'about.': 0.29; 'least': 0.30; 'implement': 0.30; 'concern,': 0.31; 'css,': 0.31; 'does': 0.31; 'to:addr:python- list': 0.32; 'source': 0.32; 'idea': 0.32; 'url:listinfo': 0.33; 'community': 0.33; 'using': 0.34; 'certain': 0.34; 'difference': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'open': 0.35; 'difficult': 0.35; 'point': 0.35; 'subject:software': 0.35; 'doing': 0.36; 'missing': 0.36; 'some': 0.37; 'url:python': 0.37; 'apr': 0.38; 'steven': 0.38; "who's": 0.38; 'received:google.com': 0.38; 'but': 0.38; 'url:org': 0.38; 'software': 0.38; 'so,': 0.38; 'science': 0.38; 'unless': 0.38; 'end': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'except': 0.39; "it's": 0.40; 'might': 0.40; 'happen': 0.61; 'charset:windows-1252': 0.61; '2011': 0.62; 'free': 0.62; 'market': 0.63; 'legal': 0.64; 'man': 0.65; 'share': 0.67; 'freedom': 0.69; 'designed': 0.69; 'subject:Free': 0.72; 'offer': 0.72; 'fear': 0.73; 'claim': 0.76; '11:31': 0.84; 'euros': 0.84; 'knowingly': 0.84; 'loses': 0.84; 'received:129': 0.84; 'wasteful': 0.84; 'dollars': 0.87; 'here...': 0.91; 'patents': 0.91; 'standards.': 0.91; 'absolutely': 0.98 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6Nknp.10080$lx3.7480@newsfe02.iad> References: <4d9c5ca5$0$29991$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <87tyebf3r3.fsf_-_@benfinney.id.au> <4d9d6a4a$0$29992$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <6Nknp.10080$lx3.7480@newsfe02.iad> Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 11:50:44 -0400 Subject: Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents From: Benjamin Kaplan To: python-list@python.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/49, host=mpv2.tis.cwru.edu X-Junkmail-SD-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A020204.4D9DDD55.00CB,ss=1,fgs=0, ip=74.125.82.44, so=2010-02-10 23:06:36, dmn=2009-09-10 00:05:08, mode=single engine X-Junkmail-IWF: false X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 68 NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.94.164.166 X-Trace: 1302191455 news.xs4all.nl 81476 [::ffff:82.94.164.166]:55827 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:2780 On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 11:31 AM, harrismh777 wrot= e: > Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> >> Let's reword your concern slightly: >> >> >> =A0 =A0 It's difficult to take a claim of =93free=94 seriously for >> =A0 =A0 technologies (including, but not limited to, HTML, CSS, C++, >> =A0 =A0 XML, Public Key Cryptography, packet-based multimedia, IPv6) >> =A0 =A0 that knowingly or unknowingly [the later not being a defence >> =A0 =A0 against infringement] implement techniques covered by specific >> =A0 =A0 idea patents held by an entity that allegedly demonstrates >> =A0 =A0 every intention, or at least some intention, of wielding them >> =A0 =A0 to restrict the freedom of software recipients. > > Steve, this is a straw man argument. Its not good argument to reword 'his= ' > concern, nor to provide a non-related analogy, nor to build a straw man t= hat > you can easily knock down. In doing so, your argument loses merit (bad > enough) but also you end up missing the other point. > > No one is 'singling out' Mono. Mono and .NET are just examples of evil > proprietary frameworks|software designed to lock-in market share and usur= p > freedom. =A0There are *many* other examples that we might talk about. But= the > main point is that if you value freedom, you will not support proprietary > frameworks. >So, if a software package, like just for example (Cobra), relies > on .NET (or Mono) then Cobra is a bad thing for freedom in computer scine= ce. > If Python is free software ( at least GPL compatible license ) then Pytho= n > is a 'good thing' from the standpoint of freedom in computer science. Tha= t > was the comparison. > Cobra does not rely on a proprietary framework. It runs on Mono, which is an open source implementation of the ECMA-334 and ECMA-335 standards. The only difference between it and Python is that Python was developed at a research institute while .NET was developed at a corporation. > There is no FUD here... > > NO FEAR > Absolutely CERTAIN > NO DOUBT > >>At this point Microsoft has absolutely nothing to offer the computer scie= nce community at large except bzillions of euros ( or dollars ) of wasteful= litigation and head-ache. Looks like FUD and smells like FUD. Unless you happen to be on Microsoft's legal team and know that they're about to sue everyone who's using Mono. > kind regards, > m harris > -- > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list >