On 2009-07-01, Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 1 Jul 2009 21:58:05 GMT, Gregory Shearman wrote:
>
>> On 2009-07-01, Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 04:41:37 -0500, Sinister Midget wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2009-07-01, Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> claimed:
>>>>> On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:44:43 +0100, Ben wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree that Mono has some practical advantages, but why are we
>>>>>> making free implementations of it instead of a competing
>>>>>> specification, which cannot be attacked by litigation?
>>>>>
>>>>> First of all, that's impossible. Any code and implementation runs
>>>>> the risk of violating someones patents. There's just no way to
>>>>> know if any piece of code you write doesn't infringe on a patent.
>>>>
>>>> Second of all, I'd rather run the risk of violating a random patent
>>>> owned by someone who isn't, or maybe even is, a dickhead by default
>>>> than to take the almost certain chance that I'm implementing
>>>> something that violates a patent of a known felon and hostile
>>>> monopoly.
>>>
>>> Well, you HAVE to run that risk. There is no choice. All software
>>> potentially infringes on someones patents. If you don't want to
>>> take that risk, you might as well get out of software.
>>
>> Or move to a country with sane patent laws.
>
> In which case, the whole Mono controversy doesn't apply to you then.
BTW, I wasn't including *my* country as one with sane patent laws. We
slavishly follow the lead from Uncle Sam.
--
Regards,
Gregory.
Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power
|
|
