<?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: A Quick Look at Mono Licensing and Microsoft Licensing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://techrights.org/2007/11/29/mono-microsoft-license-patent/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://techrights.org/2007/11/29/mono-microsoft-license-patent/</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: Roy Schestowitz</title>
		<link>http://techrights.org/2007/11/29/mono-microsoft-license-patent/comment-page-1/#comment-3950</link>
		<dc:creator>Roy Schestowitz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2007 01:29:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boycottnovell.com/2007/11/29/mono-microsoft-license-patent/#comment-3950</guid>
		<description>On Groklaw, see &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20070614231022599&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;OpenSuse developers pledge&lt;/a&gt; (at the bottom part of the article).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On Groklaw, see <a href="http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20070614231022599" rel="nofollow">OpenSuse developers pledge</a> (at the bottom part of the article).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Uncle Warthog</title>
		<link>http://techrights.org/2007/11/29/mono-microsoft-license-patent/comment-page-1/#comment-3947</link>
		<dc:creator>Uncle Warthog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 23:15:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boycottnovell.com/2007/11/29/mono-microsoft-license-patent/#comment-3947</guid>
		<description>Regarding Novell&#039;s Mono copyright assignment terms: It strikes me as funny that they would expect anyone to contribute to Mono under those conditions considering that it is, by and large, this issue which is causing them to fork OpenOffice.  Seems to me like Novell wants to have it both ways.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding Novell&#8217;s Mono copyright assignment terms: It strikes me as funny that they would expect anyone to contribute to Mono under those conditions considering that it is, by and large, this issue which is causing them to fork OpenOffice.  Seems to me like Novell wants to have it both ways.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: werner</title>
		<link>http://techrights.org/2007/11/29/mono-microsoft-license-patent/comment-page-1/#comment-3939</link>
		<dc:creator>werner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:32:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boycottnovell.com/2007/11/29/mono-microsoft-license-patent/#comment-3939</guid>
		<description>I think:  a) All this is not bad   ,  but   b) everybody should know it


We should not be worried about any kind of COMERCIAL INTERESTS w.r.t. open software.  Let the wolfs eat them each another.

But we should know this, and stay far from any comercial or &#039;property&#039; things in open source.

It&#039;s almost normal but OK that anybody who dance with the devil and use, directly or indirectly, any privat, no-open aplication,  earlier or later is enrolled with any &#039;patent rights&#039;,  &#039;license terms&#039; or things like this.   

Thus, one simply should not participate to such privat or half-privat things, nor use them.

It should also be observed, that patent rights - in opposite to copyrights - apply only to comercial concurrents.  They are irrelevant for end-users.  At least under european legislations, you can USE them as you want.  Already because of this, is irrelevant the FUD by M$.  In the worst case, they could process only sellers, but not users.

The next thing is, that other states have the right of autonomy in their public administration and in the realisation of human rights (f.ex., ensign, social integration).   They have even the right to declare the informatics, and the own development and divulgation of software for their administration, ensign etc as a public service and souvereignity function - in a few constitutions this is even the case - and divulge it (f.ex., give such open software to poor persons to realize the UNO&#039;s resolution&#039;s warrant to ensign, participation on the modernity, etc)   This is not limited by patent rights of others.  Not only because these are exclusively comercial rights, unaplicavel to no-comercial distribution, but because the economic rights always are submitted under higher rights, inclusive the government has the souvereignity to determine social function of economy etc.   Now, the FUD by M$, when &#039;advising not to use open source&#039; other country/people and their public service&#039;s autonomy, human rights,  is not only a right or even need for these countries to check / cancel their adherence to  international patent / economic agreements;  it can be a crime against public administration and souvereignity of other countries - especially when this &#039;advices&#039; lead to fears or abstence the poor people or the officials use open software for realize their fundamental rights/ensign or public/administrative functions, resp.    I think there is nothing to &#039;give gratuitly&#039; to M$ and companions, so that is time that other counties open criminal processes against such &#039;advises&#039;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think:  a) All this is not bad   ,  but   b) everybody should know it</p>
<p>We should not be worried about any kind of COMERCIAL INTERESTS w.r.t. open software.  Let the wolfs eat them each another.</p>
<p>But we should know this, and stay far from any comercial or &#8216;property&#8217; things in open source.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s almost normal but OK that anybody who dance with the devil and use, directly or indirectly, any privat, no-open aplication,  earlier or later is enrolled with any &#8216;patent rights&#8217;,  &#8216;license terms&#8217; or things like this.   </p>
<p>Thus, one simply should not participate to such privat or half-privat things, nor use them.</p>
<p>It should also be observed, that patent rights &#8211; in opposite to copyrights &#8211; apply only to comercial concurrents.  They are irrelevant for end-users.  At least under european legislations, you can USE them as you want.  Already because of this, is irrelevant the FUD by M$.  In the worst case, they could process only sellers, but not users.</p>
<p>The next thing is, that other states have the right of autonomy in their public administration and in the realisation of human rights (f.ex., ensign, social integration).   They have even the right to declare the informatics, and the own development and divulgation of software for their administration, ensign etc as a public service and souvereignity function &#8211; in a few constitutions this is even the case &#8211; and divulge it (f.ex., give such open software to poor persons to realize the UNO&#8217;s resolution&#8217;s warrant to ensign, participation on the modernity, etc)   This is not limited by patent rights of others.  Not only because these are exclusively comercial rights, unaplicavel to no-comercial distribution, but because the economic rights always are submitted under higher rights, inclusive the government has the souvereignity to determine social function of economy etc.   Now, the FUD by M$, when &#8216;advising not to use open source&#8217; other country/people and their public service&#8217;s autonomy, human rights,  is not only a right or even need for these countries to check / cancel their adherence to  international patent / economic agreements;  it can be a crime against public administration and souvereignity of other countries &#8211; especially when this &#8216;advices&#8217; lead to fears or abstence the poor people or the officials use open software for realize their fundamental rights/ensign or public/administrative functions, resp.    I think there is nothing to &#8216;give gratuitly&#8217; to M$ and companions, so that is time that other counties open criminal processes against such &#8216;advises&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

