Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down ..

[dr_nikolaus_klepp]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:

> 
> Rahul Dhesi wrote:
> [...]
>> a summary with references in the Wikipedia. You can read the opinion at
>> http://www.internetlibrary.com/pdf/Wallace-IBM-7th-Cir.pdf .
> 
> Wikipedia side, here's the summary:
> 
> 1. [FOSS contributors can't charge] "Thus the GPL propagates from
> user to user and revision to revision: neither the original author,
> nor any creator of a revised or improved version, may charge for the
> software or allow any successor to charge. ... Linux and other
> open-source projects have been able to cover their fixed costs
> through donations of time"
> 
> and
> 
> 2. [FOSS is junk] "People willingly pay for quality software even
> when they can get free (but imperfect) substitutes. Open Office is
> a free, open-source suite of word processor, spreadsheet and
> presentation software, but the proprietary Microsoft Office has
> many more users. Gimp is a free, open-source image editor, but the
> proprietary Adobe Photoshop enjoys the lion's share of the market."
> 
> and
> 
> 3. [FOSS is doomed] "The number of proprietary operating systems
> is growing, not shrinking, so competition in this market continues
> quite apart from the fact that the GPL ensures the future
> availability of Linux and other Unix offshoots."
> 
> EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th
> Circuit.
> 
> regards,
> alexander.
> 
> --
> http://gng.z505.com/index.htm
> (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can
> be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards
> too, whereas GNU cannot.)

can you post the correct link where you cited this text from?

n.