<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 80-85% of Open Source Community Backs Microvell Deal?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://techrights.org/2007/03/16/80-85-of-open-source-community-backs-microvell-deal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://techrights.org/2007/03/16/80-85-of-open-source-community-backs-microvell-deal/</link>
	<description>Free Software Sentry – watching and reporting maneuvers of those threatened by software freedom</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:00:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: gpl1</title>
		<link>http://techrights.org/2007/03/16/80-85-of-open-source-community-backs-microvell-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-435</link>
		<dc:creator>gpl1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Mar 2007 02:00:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boycottnovell.com/2007/03/16/80-85-of-open-source-community-backs-microvell-deal/#comment-435</guid>
		<description>Why do the press insist on making the deal about &quot;interoperability&quot;?  We all know that the problem with the deal is that the promise not to sue only counts for Novell&#039;s customers, which is completely against the GPL.  They simply found a loophole for it.  Why exactly would Novell think this would survive the next iteration of the GPL, unless they want to undermine it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why do the press insist on making the deal about &#8220;interoperability&#8221;?  We all know that the problem with the deal is that the promise not to sue only counts for Novell&#8217;s customers, which is completely against the GPL.  They simply found a loophole for it.  Why exactly would Novell think this would survive the next iteration of the GPL, unless they want to undermine it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Draconishinobi</title>
		<link>http://techrights.org/2007/03/16/80-85-of-open-source-community-backs-microvell-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-432</link>
		<dc:creator>Draconishinobi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:27:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boycottnovell.com/2007/03/16/80-85-of-open-source-community-backs-microvell-deal/#comment-432</guid>
		<description>&quot;I think the vast majority, and I’d quantify that at about 80 percent to 85 percent, of the open source community actually supports this deal.&quot;

From all the polls I&#039;ve seen, I think he meant the opposite ... 80 - 85 % of the OSS community does NOT support this deal. I would ask him to show me the proof. Maybe he&#039;s gonna fudge some polls ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I think the vast majority, and I’d quantify that at about 80 percent to 85 percent, of the open source community actually supports this deal.&#8221;</p>
<p>From all the polls I&#8217;ve seen, I think he meant the opposite &#8230; 80 &#8211; 85 % of the OSS community does NOT support this deal. I would ask him to show me the proof. Maybe he&#8217;s gonna fudge some polls ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

