Questions that need answering

Questions that need answering

Posted Dec 6, 2006 22:35 UTC (Wed) by rev (guest, #15082)
In reply to: Questions that need answering by NigelK
Parent article: Of hypocrisy and the FSF (Libervis)

A1: learn a bit about the patent system, Nigel. Knowing what patents might be treaded on increases ones liablility. That's why these patents where not disclosed. Enormous hypocrisy, isn't it.

A2: Novell stroke a deal with Microsoft. Microsoft promises not to sue Movell customers. Microsft can retract agreement at will. OSRM, RedHat offer indemnification against legal attackers. Very different. Microsoft is no friend of OSS, in fact Microsoft is no friend of competitors. 3Com, Netscape, client side Java, Google. Halloween documents, funneling money into baseless SCO group FUDsuit. Suspicion is that Microsft is out to hurt OSS.

A3: Please provide evidence in support of your claim that "he FSF baulk at the thought of enforcing the GPL2 due to the size of the company that is infringing it". The situation appears to be that the agreement does not vioalte the letter of the GPLv2 but the therein explicitly stated intent of it. Hence the idea of explicitly making these kind of deals useles by wording to that affect in GPLv3.

A32. Please provide evidence in support of your presumptiom that the FSF refuses to enforce the GPL.

A33. Dito.

Thank you Nigel, for spotting this Grand Conspiracy for us. Thank you.

It strikes me that your post is lacking in the fact and logic department. The logical style of it is similar to that of 9/11 "Truth Scholars": not arguing a position by means of observed and known facts and logic but by casting doubt, asking rhetorical and loaded questions and other logical fallacies. Trying to hold a desparate postion makes it a neccassity.

---

(Log in to post comments)