Re: [Debate] "Offene Standards": Koalition beharrt auf Umdefinition

[Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>]

* Martin Schröder:

> Am 22.06.07 schrieb Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>:
>> Ich weiß nicht, wie weit die Forderungen gehen. Wäre das folgende
>> ausreichend?
>>
>> | In addition, for the Eifel submission, if said submission is included
>> | in an IETF standard and Ericsson has patents that are essential to the
>> | implementation of such included submission in said standard, Ericsson
>> | is prepared to grant - on the basis of reciprocity -a paid up,
>> | nonexclusive, royalty free license on such patents for the purpose of
>> | implementing said standard, if and only if practiced under any
>> | software distributed under the present terms of the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC
>> | LICENSE (http://www.fsf.org/copyleft/gpl.html) or practiced under any
>> | operating system software in which all major components of the
>> | operating system - including the kernel, device drivers and libraries
>> | necessary to run a program - are distributed under the terms of a
>> | license that conforms to the present OPEN SOURCE DEFINITION
>> | (http://www.opensource.org/osd.html).
>
> Nein. BSD kann damit nichts anfangen.

Ach ja? Den GCC nehmen sie aber trotzdem gerne.
_______________________________________________
Debate mailing list
Debate@lists.fitug.de
http://lists.fitug.de:8080/mailman/listinfo/debate