In an editorial at Newsforge, Richard Stallman notes that, unlike IBM’s announcement last year granting open source software authors amnesty from 500 patents, Nokia has only made its recent pledge about the Linux kernel, leaving the door open for an attack on other software projects. Meanwhile, Nokia continues to push for more software patent protection from government. He says their gesture isn’t nothing, but it’s next to nothing.
Stallman whining as usual.
Boo-friggin-hoo…
NOKIA is much more giving than most commercial patent holders (when it comes to OSS). So what if they *only* indemnify the Linux kernel? That’s better than nothing! Besides, the kernel spaces is where most work/progress needs to be done at this stage. OSS Software is expansive enough…
*shrug* It just really frustrates me to see people whine about companies that aren’t giving *enough*. I’m content when they give SOMETHING/ANYTHING useful.
Well, that’s the difference. You’re content. He isn’t.
Companies like IBM, MS, and Sun etc are run by robots with these little one track coin operated brains focused only on profit. We should not trust or expect them to abide by what we understand to be the way of opensource. It dosent fit the business model. They would steal from the developers of the O.S.C and then turn around and sue or threaten for the same thing?
I loathe greed.
B*st*rds.
-nX
ever manages to even get tired of himself?
…that the first comment in the thread would be by Lumbergh, whining about Stallman.
Hey, Lumbergh, did you even read the article? Would you care to elaborate on why you feel Stallman is wrong about this? As someone who said before that you preferred the BSD to the GPL, aren’t you concerned that the BSDs could be the target of patent litigation from Nokia, while Linux wouldn’t?
Even though I don’t use the BSDs or other open-source OSes (not for any “religious” reasons, I’m just still learning about Linux – I’ll probably give FreeBSD a try one of these days), I think that Nokia should have given patent protection to all open-source projects, not just the Linux kernel. But then again I actually took a few minutes to think about the issue…
maybe it is just the start. maybe they will expand their cover.
also have a look at this http://2005.guadec.org/press/releases/nokia_donation.html “Donations of sales of the Nokia 770 Internet Tablet in the Developer Device Program will go to the GNOME Foundation”.
they seem to be putting some helpful support behind open source
Because they view the linux kernel as something that NEEDS to be indemnified Nokia obviously assterts
-> that the linux kernel is somehow nokia’s “intellectual property” => this assertion is paramount to theft on nokia’s part. The kernel is NOT their work (check the changelog)
-> that nokia could destroy the kernel should they want to => this shows why patents on software are horribly wrong, nokia can destroy the work of thousands of others at its whim because of patents
-> What about other projects they don’t indemnify ? QTopia for example, which is not open source, but defineately falls under nokia’s patents ? Or other open source projects ? KDE will most defineately violate nokia’s patents too (that means gnome will too)
What is wrong with patents : because you create something that makes use of a technique I patented does NOT make your program my property (this is horribly wrong from an ethical point of view), so you do NOT have any claims over it.
Patenting algorithms/software == theft. Intellectual property theft.
*shrug* It just really frustrates me to see people whine about companies that aren’t giving *enough*. I’m content when they give SOMETHING/ANYTHING useful.
But Nokia does not give anything! They just promise that they will not do harm to one specific software project. Since when should anyone be thankful for not getting attacked?
Do you call that whining? To me, his words read rather assertive. Quite the opposite of whining.
There’s nothing wrong with patents.It’s the way in which they are used.It took thousands of years to get a little bit civilization that has somewhat been crystallized in our laws and understanding of integrity and justice.Compared to that the patent law isn’t even an infant or embryo.Being far from perfect with to many holes in it that leaves room for miss usage.
Nevertheless something has to be done.Patents are essential but have to be carefully crafted in such a way that makes monopolism impossible and leaves no room for mis interpretation .The current laws should be revised as soon as possible without rushing into anything insane.
“just another unhappy communist”
Communism is dead.Nobody with a healthy mind set would seriously consider communism.There’s nothing wrong with legally making (a lot of) money.Although it’s crucial someone is watching over the majority that doesn’t have a clue nor have the power after they have given their vote, to see or do something about anything that contradicts with the well being of the society as a whole.It’s not a president (one person) who’s has the final say,but the people.So it’s very important to give them the tools as much as possible in order to make a good (their own) judgement about what’s really going on.
Is that Stallman is against them. I really prefer being on Gates side rather than Stallmans side. He’s a nutcase.
Honestly though, the problem is not patents in itself, it’s the length of how long they last. In the medical industry I can see why 10 years is necessary. In the IT industry I can see why 1 year is necessary. After that it should be open for all….
If Stallman’s a nutcase, he’s a good nutcase. If it wasn’t for him, there would be no such concept as free software, and Windows would occupy virtually 100% of the desktop market. Trusted Computing would have arrived a lot earlier without him.
Well, there are plenty of people bashing RMS. However, I don’t see anyone taking into account that most people use Free Software.
1) SSH, almost all commercial vendors distribute SSH in their base products. (fyi: no arguments about bsd vs gpl, its still free software)
2) DNS/BIND. How many of you type out IP address to get to web sites, or do you use URL’s.
3) Linux
4) GNU tools
5) Sendmail. Does anyone realize that the majority of mail servers are running sendmail. You send an email and indirectly your using Free Software
6) Cisco use FreeBSD 4.4 for their routers. And Cisco has something like 70 to 80 percent of market share. I guess a few of the routers could be used to route traffic on the net. FYI: I could be wrong on the exact version number of BSD that is used by Cisco
7) Juniper use BSD as well.
8) MS tcp/ip suite uses BSD code. If anyone doubts this, here is a quote and a link:
“Portions of this product are based in part on the work of the Regents of the University of California, Berkeley and its contributors. Because Microsoft has included the Regents of the University of California, Berkeley, software in this product, Microsoft is required to include the following text that accompanied such software:”
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/windowsserver2003/libr…
Free Software is used by everone, even if they don’t know it.
You give Stallman too much credit: free software existed before he ever wrote software. It wasn’t as easy to replicate it and transmit it, but it did exist.
If nothing, he certainly popularised it. The university community that he worked at was slowly moving to closed source, as were many other places.
If nothing, he certainly popularised it. The university community that he worked at was slowly moving to closed source, as were many other places.
No, he didn’t. I and many others were downloading free software off of dialup bbs’s across the country when emacs (The OS, joke for those of you who think I’m serious) was just a dream in his warped mind.
there wasn’t free software as in freedom. It was just free software as in free beer (zero price)
Free as in the same free 90% of the people who complain about something not being opensource really take advantage of. They just use it.
Stallman is a _wise_ man. Yes, he sometimes sounds strange and what he sais isn’t very popular in the software business but we should listen carefuly what he sais. 20 years ago he said that we should have a free Unix clone and he was right. What would today’s software market look like if we hadn’t gnu/linux? Would it be better? I truely doubt it. Now he is fighting against software patents and yes – the right way to do it is to say _no_ for moves of companies like IBM or Nokia, which seems to help opensource, but they secretly are pushing software patents law in Europe and other countries.
You mean Stallman is right as usual. None of his critics here seem to be able to conjure up any intelligent arguments whatsoever beyond immature childish bashing of his grooming or religious beliefs or the lack thereof.
@Jonathan Thompson: RMS does not get enough credit for organizing free software into the religion it has become today. Whether you like him or not give him props, the man was first and if you ever used anything gnu or GPL’ed you owe him at least a tip of the hat. A free copy of something snail-mailed on punch cards doesn’t amount to prior art.
Ah yes, “RMS does not get enough credit for organizing free software into the religion it has become today.” well, I could agree to the religion part, but the latter part of your statement I cannot agree with: the source was available via other sources than punch cards that was more efficient. The medium is irrelevant to the whole discussion, in reality. “Free” is “Free” but does not automatically equate to “Most Convenient” when it comes to media. Before the common populace had easy access to the internet, there were BBS’s, as well as various computer clubs available that provided for the capacity to freely exchange software source code freely. Perhaps that’s before your time, but that still qualifies as free software. Just because it isn’t exactly what RS envisioned doesn’t mean it isn’t free
One problem is that the EU has already given out a number of patents relating to software, they just can’t be enforced. The EPO isn’t about to nullify those patents.
This leaves us with the disturbing scenario in which the decision to implement patents has already been made by one of the EU’s various unelected and unaccountable commissions. The only thing left to be decided is what form the laws relating to software patent enforcement will take. Bill and friends have already won, all they’re trying to buy now is a US style system of enforcement.
Stallman and others can have all the zeal they want, but unfortunately the EU always was, and still is, a gravy train for retired national politicians. EU law, commissions and politicians can be bought and sold, so it’s not unremarkable that large international corporations view it like a marketplace.
Congratulations to all the French people who voted Non.
I kinda feel like Nokia said that they wouldn’t go after Linux as meaning free software. These announcements usually come from marketing people who probably just didn’t understand. Maybe I’m giving them too much of the benefit of the doubt. Does anyone have a link to the official document?
Is there even an official document? I mean, without a legally binding official patent license, an announcement means nothing. Does anyone have the IBM document? Without it, they could change their mind at a later date.
as RMS specified,
first it is next to nothing.
for the people who are shouting at RMS,
what is the guarantee that Nokia will not sue in the future ??
people should not just blabber. think clearly and speak…
RMS is not a person who just says somthing for now just to promote the commercial support like most people do.
if nokia submits all its code to GPL or releases all patents as free, then RMS would surely thank them, as it is the true way of showing support to the Free Software World as this is the only way to make sure that no one can be sued even by Nokia in future..
Right now, releasing the patents is the best way for the companies to support Free Software Foundation.
Please all companies RELEASE THE PATENTS …
doing anything other than releasing the patents will NOT support Free Software Foundation.
‘Big Companies’ should have a look at http://www.gnu.org
to understand what really a help for the Free Software Community…
regards,
a free software hacker
Or they could just release their code under a BSD License.
It doesnt matter if they give complete indemnification for all OSS, they still lobby for software patents. It’s not about their not “giving” away enough patents, becaus that’s only PR in the face of what they really are doing. You think it’s a coincidence that Sweden^H^H^H^H^H^HEricsson, and Finland^H^H^H^H^H^H^HNokia, are the among the strongest supporters for the pro-swpat proposal in the EU (along with Ireland^H^H^H^HMicrosoft)?
The free software community is built around the principle that knowledge be shared and its usage be unrestricted. Software patents are incompatible with that. One cannot rightfully say that one is in favor of both free software and software patents (at least not to all extent). They exclude each other. Keep that in mind when reading Nokia’s statements.
once again…. say what you want about RMS but we wouldnt be where we are without him, PERIOD! Is he probably a nut – in his own special way! Is he religous – yes thank RMS, he had/has to be to start/keep free software free or else it would slowly backslide into the SOS. I find it very hypocritical of them to use open source, yet argue FOR patents, and make a statement that in one instance it is ok but not any others….
Of course, I actually dont think NOkia is blowing smoke and basically gives me the willys that they IMPLY the kernel infringes on their work but that it is ok!
Of course, one question should be – Is there a open source friendly phone maker?
“You give Stallman too much credit: free software existed before he ever wrote software”
Stallman didn’t invent the Free concept, but he did invent the copylefted concept which means software will stay free. This is an important concept. Free software existed but it was easy to take free software, change it and not allow anyone access to your modifications. As someone above me noted, MS Windows’s TCP/IP stack uses BSD code. You cannot, however, look at the source code for Windows’s stack, modify it, or share your modifications because the BSD license is free, but not copylefted. Similarly, the developers of Kerberose had all their hard work “embraced and extended” by Microsoft when they took Kerberose and made a proprietary modification of it for use as the authentication portion of Active Directory. Had Kerberose been GPL’d, Microsoft couldn’t have done that without contributing their modifications back so that others could make compatible products.
It’s much easier for non-copylefted software to get sidelined by companies because they can hire the developers with the condition that all updates they make from here on out must be non-free. That lets a company relatively inexpensively destroy free software. Stallman’s copyleft approach, for better or worse, eliminates that ability.