Conversation
Notices
-
Monday, 29-Jun-09 13:00:58 UTC from web
-
@atoponce What may look beautiful and a breeze now, may become hard and not-so-pretty once you're sued. Hope you won't get sued in the end.
-
-
@atoponce Personally am a fan of the rich class libs myself...
-
@atoponce To each their own. :) I'm not really a fan of non-staticly typed languages anymore...
-
@atoponce: thats the point. there are much more java devs than .net .net has failed to gain a foothold on the server.
-
@mtrausch Features taken from pre-existing languages are unpatentable. The new features, certainly are patented. http://ur1.ca/6gi1 !gnu
-
@prosario2000 C# != BCL. Your assertion that C# is patented is not proved. A prog lang is not a process, not patentable. !gnu
-
@prosario2000 What is patentable about a non-process like a programming language, hrm? Please (re?)read patent law. !gnu
-
@davide89v The license looks free to me. If the issue is of patents, please cite a patent number, else it is a non issue.
Aaron Toponce likes this. -
@davide89v After all, the !linux kernel, part of most !gnu systems, allegedly infringes 235 patents, why is it any safer? http://is.gd/1i6t0
Aaron Toponce likes this. -
@mtrausch let us not forget #samba with #openchange. i'm sure there are patents aplenty infringed there
-
@mtrausch not so easy as it seems, because this is MS telling that !linux infringes 235 patents
-
@mtrausch for !mono, for example, we already know that the base is covered by patents, because they decided to implement is as .net
-
@rsalveti And? It is no diff. than “Mono is dangerous, it *MAY* be patented, don't use it.” It's fuzzy, vague, worthless.
-
@rsalveti In the U.S., it is not patentable subject matter per current case law (see Bilski) anyway. Expect SCOTUS to confirm.
-
@rsalveti What proof? Show a patent number that is valid under current law that is the only possible proof; otherwise, it is speculation.
-
@mtrausch but no one told that is actually not speculation. That's why I *guess* it easier, as does !fsf.
-
@rsalveti Without a valid patent number, it *is* speculation. There's no grey area; there is proof of an assertion, or a baseless assertion.
-
la discussione nel gruppo gnu riguardo C# si fa calda
-
@davide89v And? A runtime can be implemented in different ways, compared with an algo, evasion is possible where s/w patents are valid.
-
@davide89v And we started using Ogg as a way around that, didn't we? US now holds algos as "akin to laws of nature", so not patentable.
All Identi.ca content and data are available under the