Some GPLv3 clarifications from the FSF

Posted Sep 26, 2006 23:39 UTC (Tue) by pinky0x51 (guest, #40742)
In reply to: Some GPLv3 clarifications from the FSF by sveinrn
Parent article: Some GPLv3 clarifications from the FSF

>>so i don't think that they have any problem to check all their software distributions against all software patents
>I have read a couple of software patents, and with the convoluted language they are written in, I am usually only able to get som very faint idea about what is being covered. So I don't think that is possible.

maybe it isn't possible. I'm even sure it isn't possible.
But that's the point. IBM is pro software patents, IBM tells governments that software patents are a great idea and that their is no problem to deal with them and than i take them by their word and say "you can deal will all the patents out their, than you shouldn't have a problem to deal with your own patents". We shouldn't allow them to take one position if they speak to politicians and another position if they speak to the Free Software Community. They have to decide if software patents are a good idea or not and if they can deal with them in a honor way. They have decided that it's a good idea and that they can deal with it now they have to deal with it.

Even if i accept your argument (only in the discussion with you, in a talk to someone like IBM i would take the position described above) than you have to look at the irony in it. They cross-license with their competitors. So they can promise not to sue the competitor, but they can't promise not to sue their customers? As a customer i wouldn't buy anything from a company which sells something to me and says "but maybe we will sue you with our patents if you use the thing you have bought from us in a way we don't like".

You can make it even easier. You don't have to be a lawyer to understand the GPL you only have to be a lawyer if you want to find holes in the licence. But if you want to use the license in honor you just have to understand the simple idea: I sell you the program and you have the right to use it for any purpose, study and modify it, share it and copy modified versions under the same license. I think it's not hard to understand it and exactly this is the spirit in which you should act and nothing can happen. But if you think that you can make this promise through copyright and than cancel it through technology like DRM, through patent law or through any other law or technology which could be appear in the future than you should better stay away from GPL code and never use or distribute it because than the license makes promises you can't abide.