| |||||||||||||
The trouble with OpenBTSThe trouble with OpenBTSPosted Feb 25, 2009 15:18 UTC (Wed) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)In reply to: The trouble with OpenBTS by mjw Parent article: The trouble with OpenBTS
"Sure, if there is active enforcement by a patent holder against you for distributing a specific piece of software then you might effectively be forced to stop any distribution of the code even if it is Free Software. But that also cannot be hold against you as distributor"
Given that Red Hat and Novell is currently fighting a lawsuit for some patent infringement claims, I do think that distributions can be held liable by patent holders. In places where software patents are valid and enforced, the effect of patents are similar or actually worse than copyright restrictions.
(Log in to post comments)
The trouble with OpenBTS Posted Feb 25, 2009 16:29 UTC (Wed) by mjw (subscriber, #16740) [Link]
Agreed completely. For a distribution based in a jurisdiction where someone actively tries to ban some freedoms through patent claims, or for a distribution backed by sponsors that are easy targets for evil patent trolls this is a very serious problem.
But you shouldn't hold that against such a distribution. They are just forced to not distribute some Free Software that others can and will happily distribute to their users. That doesn't make such a distribution less free. It just means they ship a different selection of free software out of necessity.
|
|||||||||||||