Conversation
Notices
-
unless there is a real good explanation for this, it is completely unacceptable. http://is.gd/cMDqj !ubuntu
-
@melissawm what's wrong with that? Canonical's basically saying "there's no way anybody could have a claim against you if you use FLOSS...
-
@melissawm ...but if they do - no problemo, we'll handle this; stay calm, enjoy the ride".
-
@rysiek it is completely undermining all other distros while in a way assuming guilt for violating patents!
-
@jkakar saying that they "will cover for you" in case of ip infringement says other distros are not legit, and assumes there is infringement
-
@melissawm and how is that assuming guilt if IP violations? If a parent is responsible for their child, it doesn't mean they're *guilty*!
-
@rysiek exactly. "ubuntu is the only real legitimate distro, the others are lying to you" is not undermining??
-
@melissawm the "guilty" part comes up only when the child does something wrong.
-
@melissawm: Really? That seems like a lot to assume. Corporations have concerns (usually unfounded) about IP. It just removes them.
-
@melissawm where is the "others are lying to you" part exactly?
-
@rysiek considering novell and patent deals history, that's not my interpretation of it. like i said, i could be wrong
-
@melissawm and there is *NOTHING* about being the ONLY legitimate distro. it's justs aying that IF somebody puts a claim, they'll cover it
-
@melissawm that's why there's an implication there - "IF * THEN *". IF somebody puts a claim THEN we'll step in. that does not in any way
-
@melissawm say that there is even a slightest chance of said claims being put
-
@melissawm hah, have you read what Shuttleworth said about patent deals with MS? "that's racketeering; it's illegal".
-
@melissawm take this for size: "IF aliens attack, THEN I will defend you"; nothing in this sentence says that: a). aliens *will* attack;
-
@rysiek this is just the last of a lot of small little suspicious things about ubuntu lately, that's what bothers me.
-
@melissawm b). aliens even exist; c). in such an unlikely event only I will be able to defend you; d). such attack would even be dangerous
-
@melissawm: Yeah, I can understand that. @sabdfl has a pretty clear stance, though, I'd be surprised if it's changed: http://is.gd/cMED9
-
@melissawm well, "I'm bothered" and "it's completely unacceptable" are a bit away from each other, aren't they? ;)
-
@melissawm the former is just expressing concern; the latter - to me - is fearmongering and prolly FUD to large extent
-
@rysiek now, consider there is a crook saying everyday "aliens will attack!". even considering the possibility legitimizes his claim
-
@rysiek it's like saying "yeah, microsoft is full of fud, but in case that is true... "
-
@rysiek i don't know. i think "if__then__" will be read as "you know that other distro? it won't protect you WHEN the legal claims come"
-
@melissawm The patent deal is not good, imo, because money goes to Microsoft whether you infringe or not.
-
@melissawm touche. still, you left c). and d). unanswered. I'm not saying only I can defend; I'm not saying it's even dangerous.
-
@melissawm Whereas, with ubuntu assurance it only goes to *whoever* you *do* infringe on *if* you infringe (and you don't have to pay). ;-)
-
@melissawm an you know, same with - say - Debian's package policies. like saying "you won't be protected by Debian policies when you choose
-
@nobu **and you don't have to pay infringement costs
-
@melissawm ...the other distros" thing is, again, it doesn't say other distos are inherently unsafe.
-
@melissawm I think it is a good idea for companies that will not relly on 100% free software despite being aware of all Linux advantages.
-
@melissawm: Completely unacceptable? Welcome to the real world. Businesses won't adopt a platform without managing risk.
-
@melissawm it may be a dangerous precedent, but it was probably a customer demand. Especially in the us,with the highest lawyer per capita.
All Identi.ca content and data are available under the