Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 29th Mar 2007 22:07 UTC, submitted by anonymous
Microsoft Software behemoth Microsoft could be one of the biggest losers from proposed license changes to the Linux operating system unveiled Wednesday. That's a possible outcome of updates to the license pushed by the FSF. The FSF wants to make mutually exclusive pacts such as the Novell-Microsoft open-source agreement a violation of the next iteration of the GNU GPL, the license that governs Linux use. "It is unfortunate that the FSF is attempting to use the GPLv3 to prevent future collaboration among industry leaders to benefit customers," said Horacio Gutierrez, Microsoft's vice president of intellectual property and licensing.
Thread beginning with comment 225759
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: You are kidding, right?
by cjcox on Thu 29th Mar 2007 22:36 UTC in reply to "You are kidding, right?"
cjcox
Member since:
2006-12-21

While true, I don't think we've seen anything take on patents so directly. In the past, companies obtained patents just for such things as deal making... GPLv3 says no to that. GPLv2 was merely about preservation of code... which might be a tough pill for some companies to swallow... but GPLv3 extends it to restrict what companies can/cannot do with their patents (and in fact, without too much tie in to the code itself.. just be frank and honest about it all).

Reply Parent Score: 2

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Now, that's wrong.

The only difference in regard to patents between GPL2 and GPL3 is that GPL3 has an explicit clause against it, while GPL2 is merely implicit. But if you release code under the GPL2 using your patented code, then the patent is released under the GPL2 - for everybody to use (under the GPL2). The same goes for releasing it under GPL3. What _is_ the difference is certain DRM-restrictions and limitations on "we promise not to sue your customers"-deals.

Reply Parent Score: 5

bornagainenguin Member since:
2005-08-07

No, the framers of the GPLv3 simply want to ensure senseless software patents on prior art don't cripple people's abilities to continue to code.

If it's a tough pill to swallow for those companies then they should look at the new GPLv3 regarding patents the same way they looked at GPLv2 with regarding code--as a way of contributing and benefiting without others profiting off of your work as they could under BSD...

--bornagainpenguin

Reply Parent Score: 3