| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
hmm. a pro-swpat group takes control of the mediahmm. a pro-swpat group takes control of the mediaPosted Mar 3, 2009 20:46 UTC (Tue) by coriordan (guest, #7544)Parent article: The Linux Foundation acquires Linux.com
Here's where I start to worry. I'll be delighted if time proves me wrong.
LF do some mildly useful anti-swpat stuff, but almost all of their funding comes from pro-software-patent companies who fight on the same side as MS against the free software community.
The question is, how will LF's editorial control influence linux.com's coverage of software patents?
(Log in to post comments)
hmm. a pro-swpat group takes control of the media Posted Mar 3, 2009 21:33 UTC (Tue) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link]
Jim Zemlin is an effective manager, and he works effectively for the LF board, which mainly represents large companies. The LF charter is written to give board voting control to the largest members: Platinum up to 10, Gold 3, Silver 1, At-large up to 5. On the current board, representatives of software patent holders do outnumber the kernel hackers:
Larry Augustin (investor, former CEO, VA Linux Systems)
James Bottomley, Novell/LF Technical Advisory Board
Alan Clark, Novell
Wim Coekaerts, Oracle
Masahiro Date, Fujitsu
Frank Fanzilli (board member for several proprietary
Doug Fisher, Intel
Dan Frye, IBM
Tim Golden, Bank of America
Hisashi Hashimoto, Hitachi
Brian Pawlowski, NetApp
Chris Schlaeger, AMD
Tsugikazu Shibata, NEC
Eric Thomas, Texas Instruments
Martin Whittaker, Hewlett-Packard
Christy Wyatt, Motorola
yes, that's what I'm afraid of Posted Mar 4, 2009 15:01 UTC (Wed) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] I saw their board and their funders and that the fee structure means that the money from the eight Platinum members eclipses all other sources of income combined. Their money comes, by a large majority, from a Who's Who of pro-software-patent lobbyists. They're only missing Microsoft. This raises the important question of media: how will LF's editorial control influence linux.com's coverage of software patents?
my tone Posted Mar 4, 2009 15:46 UTC (Wed) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] Ah. You were more or less agreeing. I misread you post and though I had to defend my question :-)
|
|
||||||||||||