Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 04:30:09PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > [...]. I have absolutely no idea whether any > > of the software that I package is affected by some patent. > > You're putting all patents in the same bag, and it's not like that.
Agreed; I attempted to forestall this blurring of the lines, apparently unsuccessfully. > For example, if you distribute a windowing system, you're most > likely violating lots of "crap patents" and can't tell which ones, > but if you distribute LAME, you can be sure as hell you are > infringing patents from Fraunhofer. A more significant distinction is, as I've pointed out several times already, that the Fraunhofer patents on MPEG audio algorithms *are known to be actively enforced* by the holder against parties who infringe those patents. That's the distinction that seems to be the convention of ftp-master for considering patent-encumbered packages too risky to redistribute to recipients of Debian. -- \ “Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?” “Um, I think so, | `\ Brainie, but why would anyone want to Pierce Brosnan?” —_Pinky | _o__) and The Brain_ | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
