<?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: Black Duck Wants Proprietary Monopoly on Free Software Analysis, SFLC Responds</title>
	<atom:link href="http://techrights.org/2010/02/05/kuhn-on-black-duck-status-update/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://techrights.org/2010/02/05/kuhn-on-black-duck-status-update/</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/2010/02/05/kuhn-on-black-duck-status-update/comment-page-1/#comment-80691</link>
		<dc:creator>Roy Schestowitz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 18:48:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boycottnovell.com/?p=26411#comment-80691</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve just noticed that Glyn Moody too remarked on this:

http://twitter.com/glynmoody/statuses/8548102688

One part from Bradly which is worth emphasising would be:

&quot;&lt;em&gt;The saddest part, though, is that Black Duck again shows itself as a company whose primary goal is to prey on people&#039;s fear of software freedom. They make proprietary software and acquire software patents with the primary goal of scaring people into buying stuff they probably don&#039;t need. I&#039;ve spent a lot more time working regularly on FLOSS license compliance than anyone who has ever worked at Black Duck. Simply put, coming into (and staying in) compliance is a much simpler process than they say, and can be done easily without the use of overpriced proprietary analysis of codebases.&lt;/em&gt;&quot;

Black Duck still has some apologists in the FOSS world.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve just noticed that Glyn Moody too remarked on this:</p>
<p><a href="http://twitter.com/glynmoody/statuses/8548102688" rel="nofollow">http://twitter.com/glynmoody/statuses/8548102688</a></p>
<p>One part from Bradly which is worth emphasising would be:</p>
<p>&#8220;<em>The saddest part, though, is that Black Duck again shows itself as a company whose primary goal is to prey on people&#8217;s fear of software freedom. They make proprietary software and acquire software patents with the primary goal of scaring people into buying stuff they probably don&#8217;t need. I&#8217;ve spent a lot more time working regularly on FLOSS license compliance than anyone who has ever worked at Black Duck. Simply put, coming into (and staying in) compliance is a much simpler process than they say, and can be done easily without the use of overpriced proprietary analysis of codebases.</em>&#8221;</p>
<p>Black Duck still has some apologists in the FOSS world.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roy Schestowitz</title>
		<link>http://techrights.org/2010/02/05/kuhn-on-black-duck-status-update/comment-page-1/#comment-80665</link>
		<dc:creator>Roy Schestowitz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:55:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boycottnovell.com/?p=26411#comment-80665</guid>
		<description>Sure. I thought about it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sure. I thought about it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Needs Sunlight</title>
		<link>http://techrights.org/2010/02/05/kuhn-on-black-duck-status-update/comment-page-1/#comment-80650</link>
		<dc:creator>Needs Sunlight</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 13:39:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boycottnovell.com/?p=26411#comment-80650</guid>
		<description>Probably could use &gt;cite&lt; tags around &lt;cite&gt;Linux Insider&lt;/cite&gt; so that it is more obvious that a specific web site is meant and not a general category of person.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Probably could use &gt;cite&lt; tags around <cite>Linux Insider</cite> so that it is more obvious that a specific web site is meant and not a general category of person.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

