Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Patents

Stallman Unimpressed by Nokia Patent Pledge 386

Posted by CmdrTaco from the stuff-to-read dept.
Joe Barr writes "NewsForge is running a commentary by Richard Stallman on the recent PR blitz by Nokia concerning their promise not to enforce patent claims against the Linux kernel project. Stallman's take? "In effect, Nokia is lobbying the European Union to give Nokia and many others a new kind of weapon to shoot at software authors and users with--and telling the legislators, 'Don't worry, it's safe to let private armies carry these guns, because we promise that our gunmen won't shoot anyone in that building.'""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Stallman Unimpressed by Nokia Patent Pledge More

Stallman Unimpressed by Nokia Patent Pledge

Comments Filter:

  • Yeah.. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Godman ( 767682 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @01:25PM (#12677283) Homepage Journal
    ...and Hitler promised that he would stop after annexing the sudetenland. Appeasment and promises never work. I hope the EU doesn't give in. We've seen what happens when they (europeans) do. (Of course, we aren't talking about World War 3 here, but still, we've seen what happens)
  • Imagine such a thing. I think highly of the man, and admire his dedication, but when did we ever hear of Stallman being pleased.
    • You left off a couple of words...

      when did we ever hear on Slashdot of Stallman being pleased.

      In this case, do shoot the messenger.

    • Re:Stallman......Unimpressed ? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      when did we ever hear of Stallman being pleased.

      Off the top of my head: "I am very pleased to see that Qt is now available under the GPL," said Stallman. "This is a big win for free software and a great gift from Trolltech to the community." [linuxdevices.com]

      I think it's important to point out that, historically, the way things tend to go is:

      1. Stallman says that something isn't good enough.
      2. Lots of people laugh at him or say that he's being a zealot.
      3. He turns out to be right.
      4. People conveniently forget about his warn

    • Re:Stallman......Unimpressed ? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by say ( 191220 ) <<on.hadiarflow> <ta> <evgis>> on Monday May 30, 2005 @03:10PM (#12677910) Homepage

      This is probably more of a result of the way the media works. When do Slashdot publish writeups on Stallman? When he complains about something. Almost everyone who get attention are either complaining or some kind of entertainment superstar.

      For all we know, Richard Stallman might be sitting on a chair enjoying life ninety-nine out of a hundred days.

      On a more serious note: There is a rather grave difference between being pleased personally, and being pleased professionally. Stallman is professionally known to be a man of great demands and little compromise. It's probably because the wrong questions are asked that we never hear about him being pleased. Personally, I think he's quite a pleased guy.

    • "Stallman very pleased with Linux remaining GPL"

      "Stallman very pleased with his dinner"

      "Stallman took a crap"

      "Stallman very pleased with his love life"

      (Okay, the last one is newsworthy)

  • What the? (Score:5, Funny)

    by orson_of_fort_worth ( 871181 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @01:26PM (#12677292)
    When did RMS become such a cynic?

  • bussiness (Score:5, Insightful)

    by diegocgteleline.es ( 653730 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @01:28PM (#12677311)
    1) Try to make software patents valid everywhere
    2) File some patents
    3) Allow open source software to use your patents
    4) ???

    So, if patents are a "good thing" that encourages innovation, why is nokia allowing open source (ie: anyone) to use them for free? As far as I can see, they're contradicting themselves
    • Does innovation honestly need much encouragement these days? Maybe we're too busy competing with eachother over patents to notice..
    • About the same reason why companies are investing in FOSS in general, I'd say - you make more money than you lose that way (or at least on average). If you have a goose that lays golden eggs, you feed and nurture and protect it so it will continue to lay those golden eggs.
    • Open source isn't the same as "anyone". If Microsoft wants to use patents freely licensed for open source use in the NT kernel they have to distribute NT under an open source license. That's actually a good deal. If all software patent holders did that, it would be a real boost for open source.

      Furthermore, one can well make the argument that encouraging open source development is good for innovation, since a lot of (arguably most) innovation in the industry has first appeared in open source form.

      I'm no

    • Re:bussiness (Score:2, Insightful)

      by zarr ( 724629 )
      4: Free publicity
      5: PROFIT!!!

      If there is anything patented by nokia in the linux kernel, then those patents became free-for-all the moment nokia started to distribute [theregister.co.uk] the linux kernel themselves. When nokia claim that any patented code in the linux kernel (which they are distributing themselves, remember) cannot be used outside an official linux kernel release, they are violating the "no further restrictions" cluse (section 6) of the GPL.

      Seems to me that either there are nothing whatsoever patented b

  • the art of selective enforcement and rule setting (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Leontes ( 653331 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @01:29PM (#12677324)
    Previously unenforced laws suddenly being enforced has historically led to massive resentment and revolution. Some of the taxation that was collected prior to the american war for independence had been on the books for some time. Imagine what would happen in the us if police routinely started pulling people over for speeding only a few miles over the speedlimit. (provided that they, of course, removed the uncertainty from the guestimation of the speed of trave)l.

    On the other hand, reminds me a bit of the 'patriot' act. Oooh, don't worry, we'll only use it for the terrorists (which we now include people who disagree with the president).

    Lack of enforcement is a tricky tricky thing. I've always thought that regulations should represent how things work, not the way we wish they worked. Saves this kind of doublespeak from occurring.
    • Imagine what would happen in the us if police routinely started pulling people over for speeding only a few miles over the speedlimit.

      Yes. Imagine that [bbc.co.uk]. It would suck, wouldn't it. Whatever happened to quality of life.

      • Korea has had those speed cameras on a few major roads for some time now (e.g. the road to Incheon airport). Last year when I was over there, the cars would suddenly slow down at odd spots in the road. They would then accelerate like mad a quarter mile later.

        I asked what this was about; they said "you learn where the cameras are".

        Speed cameras == STUPID IDEA.

        Unless you think burning more gas and causing accidents due to erratic driving are good ideas.
        • cars would suddenly slow down at odd spots in the road. They would then accelerate like mad a quarter mile later

          Imagine, if you will, a fiendish system that records your number plate and time at the start of your journey, and records the time when you arrive at your destination. If you have done the 120 miles between London and Bristol in anything less than the time it would take at 70mph, that means you've been speeding.
          Only you don't have to imagine it. It's here.

  • In a public Nokia statement... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Mancat ( 831487 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @01:30PM (#12677328) Homepage
    A Nokia executive has publicly stated, "Our failure to impress Richard M. Stallman is a failure to the entire open source community. We are greatly ashamed that we could not meet the golden standards of such a modern visionary as Mr. Stallman, a man who has contributed much to society in the form of... We're not sure, but we're very ashamed that Mr. Stallman 'is not impressed.' As a result, Nokia will never again attempt to collaborate with the open source community. We are just not the type of corporation that can handle rejection."

    The executive later killed himself.

    • Re:In a public Nokia statement... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Timesprout ( 579035 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @01:53PM (#12677465)
      I know you are joking but you have point. If I was a senior exec at Nokia right now I might be thinking 'well fuck you stallman you ungrateful cunt' as I call the legal dept and ask them to start looking into potential patent infrinments of FOSS.

      I think the community as a whole would be better served if Mr Stallman could just say, thanks Nokia for making a step in the right direction but theres a way to go yet. Provoking them pointlessly and making absolutely absurd analogies is only going to come back and bite you in the end.

      Its like the US, slow to anger but watch out when they pick the big stick up cos someone is getting it royally.

      • Re:In a public Nokia statement... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Rakshasa Taisab ( 244699 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @02:02PM (#12677520) Homepage
        "It was nice of you to try so hard, even though you did nothing, and we applaud you."

        I think the community, (maybe we're talking about different communities?), is better served with Stallman pointing out how useless the Nokia announcement is. Although most of us could see it immidiately, some didn't.

      • Re:In a public Nokia statement... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by denis-The-menace ( 471988 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @02:35PM (#12677712)
        ...as I (Nokia exec) call the legal dept and ask them to start looking into potential patent infrinments of FOSS.
        And therefore prouving RMS' point.

      • Re:In a public Nokia statement... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by orasio ( 188021 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @02:38PM (#12677727) Homepage
        Nokia says it won't hurt the Linux kernel.
        Of course that doesn't mean they will leave you GNU/Linux OS alone, if they see any infringements.

        In the meantime, Nokia lobbies for software patents in Europe, and RMSs analogy is exact.

        They are asking for lots of power, and just claim they won't hurt the Linux kernel. Of course they won't, they don't want to alienate the developers of software that earns them money!

      • Wrong - The GPL forces Nokia to do this (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Nokia has to do this because of newly announced LINUX tablet. It is not goodwill, they are obligated to do this under the GPL.

        "The GPL says: "[..] if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies [..] through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program."

        Nokia is it seems releasing a Linux based device. When they do that the GPL is quite clear about the patents

      • Its like the US, slow to anger

        What?!? The first thing that most people in the world think of when the US is mentioned is ongoing military activity.

        Like the war in Iraq. It was provoked by somehthing real?

      • thanks Nokia for making a step in the right direction but theres a way to go yet.

        Why should Stallman hold his tongue? He laid out the rationale for free software [fsf.org] 20 years ago; everything he foresaw has come to pass. I'm amazed he has any patience left. At some point, there's only so much that one man can do. Sooner or later, you, I, the rest of us who write (or use) software are going to have to choose whether to stick up for those beliefs, or bend over and be screwed. To Stallman's credit, he hasn't gi

    • a man who has contributed much to society in the form of...

      *cough* ...GCC? The man may be something of a lunatic when it comes to advocacy, but don't act like he hasn't contributed immensely to open source (something I feel is a very valid contribution to society, even if it doesn't *gasp* get you paid).
      • Let me quote Jone's First Law:
        Anyone who makes a significant contribution to any field of endeavor, and stays in that field long enough, becomes an obstruction to its progress -- in direct proportion to the importance of their original contribution.
        If I didn't knew better, I'd believe it was written with Stallman in mind.

  • General Stallman (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @01:30PM (#12677331) Homepage Journal
    The patent pledge is important: it removes the uncertainty that Nokia might find its (already) patented tech in Linux, and sue; Nokia guarantees they wouldn't. But it's mostly important to Nokia. I'm not aware of any credible evidence that any Nokia tech is actually in the kernel, so it's really more of a gesture. And a way to warn off future inclusion of their tech in kernels, by saying "we were generous before, don't exploit your friends".

    But Stallman is right about the other Nokia stance on European patents. They're bad, for Nokia like everyone else in the long run. They prevent Nokia from improving on innovation elsewhere. With a big company that can't take risks like small developers, Nokia benefits from unimpeded traffic in software. And as a hardware vendor, more software sells their products, with a protected base that can be protected by valid, traditional hardware patents.

    Stallman's also right that Nokia's "harmless" patent guarantee is more important as propaganda to mollify the Linux community, their most dangerous opponent in the EU patent debate. We should accept their guarantee on its own merits, but not grant an inch on the meritless demands to chain innovation.

    • Re:General Stallman (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jeffkjo1 ( 663413 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @01:36PM (#12677361) Homepage
      But Stallman is right about the other Nokia stance on European patents. They're bad, for Nokia like everyone else in the long run. They prevent Nokia from improving on innovation elsewhere. With a big company that can't take risks like small developers, Nokia benefits from unimpeded traffic in software. And as a hardware vendor, more software sells their products, with a protected base that can be protected by valid, traditional hardware patents.

      Actually, they aren't bad for Nokia, or any large software company. Software patents will not stop large software companies in the list bit. When they are sued by another large software company (think Sun and IBM), they will simply sign a cross-licensing agreement.
      Software patents allow Nokia, and others, to go after smaller software companies, and force them into massive lawsuits, or sell themselves to Nokia.
      Effectively, software patents preserve bad business models.

      • Actually, they aren't bad for Nokia, or any large software company. Software patents will not stop large software companies in the list bit. When they are sued by another large software company (think Sun and IBM), they will simply sign a cross-licensing agreement.

        True, when a big company comes into conflict with the patents of another big company, that's usually what happens.

        But when a company like Nokia gets attacked by a patent profiteer, that only has a patent and doesn't make any products, then

    • Re:General Stallman (Score:2, Interesting)

      by pandymen ( 884006 )
      I would have to disagree that patents would also be bad for Nokia in the long run. They are poised right now to snatch up a very large portion of IP. With that, they can probably bargain for IP licenses from anyone else in the future. Personally, I do not believe in software patents in general. In the US, far too many trivial, extremely broad patents were granted that allow companies like SCO to sue small-time devlopers for using simple programming concepts. Hopefully the EU doesn't go through with it;

      • Re:General Stallman (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @01:53PM (#12677463) Homepage Journal
        The longterm will see Nokia paying to participate in innovation they could have for free - the traditional model of making new learning available to everyone, without restriction, that has sustained innovation for centuries. Nokia will necessarily have a minority of monopolies on innovations, and will have to pay whatever the other monopoly holders demand for their licenses. The economics you describe help a patent holder only when 1> they have the majority of the patents, and 2> they do not have property, like hardware, that has a cost of duplication, which can be controlled with traditional (cheap and predictable) market enforcement. Neither condition applies to Nokia, so their net result is a loss. IP patents do, however, give their equity marketers something easy (if fabricated) to promote, which big companies often prefer to product development, or even product marketing.

        The whole EU government structure is still forming. That's especially evident this week, as France stops their Constitution from completion. So now is the time for people to work our influence, before the system is fully defined, and the big corporations can game it privately with their inevitable political and economic bribes/threats^Winfluence. Hopefully Europeans have learned from the US disgrace the mockery of justice that results in the market when the suppliers control its rules, and the apathetic consumers are treated like bottomless holes into which to shovel crap. With any luck, Europeans will protect their rights from these IP monopolists, and those Americans working for that same justice will get a powerful ally. Or we're all doomed - as usual.

    • The patent pledge is important: it removes the uncertainty that Nokia might find its (already) patented tech in Linux, and sue; Nokia guarantees they wouldn't.

      Did you even read the press release??? Here is a critical quote:

      Nokia, therefore, issues the legally binding Patent Statement, which has been posted on its website at www.nokia.com/iprstatements. The Patent Statement applies to Nokia's patents infringed by current official releases of the Linux Kernel and all future official releases of the Lin

      • Of course I read their statement. That's why I wrote

        'And a way to warn off future inclusion of their tech in kernels, by saying "we were generous before, don't exploit your friends".'

        in the post to which you replied. Did you really read my post? Until you do, there's no point debating the value of Nokia's swearing off SCO-style FUD.
  • PS. If you can present me with a copy of a real threat letter that was sent by a patent holder to a free software developer, that would be useful.

    So its pretty safe to say then that FOSS is not exactly being swamped with patent infringment claims, no matter how massively Mr Stallman like to exaggerate the 'threat'. So his point, other than FUD is what exactly?
    • that there is a great threat that will due great damage to the Free software community if left alone.
      Would you wait till there is someone in your house with a gun to raise the alarm, or before?
    • Two main problems with your reasoning:

      1. Don't confuse not happening now with won't ever happen. If most FOSS projects are not being bothered now it's because they're flying under the radar, with too small a market share to either be exploitable or worth suing for damages. When that is no longer true (i.e. Linux) expect to see lots of problems.

      2. There are probably a number of stories out there with little to no confirmation. Perhaps many of them are real (and many are no doubt apocryphal) but RMS

    • That's why it is a threat, and not a different kind of problem, yet.

      The American administration would probably be nice enough to not to use the authoritorian powers granted to it by law unjustfully, but that does not mean a future administration will not exploit those. That's what "threat" basically means here.

  • of threats and loaded guns (Score:5, Insightful)

    by v1 ( 525388 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @01:38PM (#12677372) Homepage Journal
    You don't give a loaded gun to someone unless you want them to be able to shoot someone. Conversely, you don't carry a loaded gun unless you have the resolve to use it should the need arise.

    Anyone telling you they want to carry a loaded gun around just because they want to brandish it or "just because", is either lying to you or is a fool. Since decisions like this are made by lawyers, it's very unlikely they are playing the fool. That leaves only one alternative.

    Companies will take their actions and determination as far as they possibly can, "to the full extent of the law" is the usual phrase used. If you give them a foot, don't expect them to stop at 10 inches just because they say they will. They have absolutely every intention of using the full foot when push comes to shove and they want something bad enough. If they had no intention of using the full foot, they wouldn't be even slightly concerned about you trying to limit them to 10 inches.

    Laws are there to STOP people from taking things too far. If the law places the line anywhere besides where it belongs, the law is broken.

  • Patents as Weapons (Score:5, Funny)

    by njcoder ( 657816 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @01:40PM (#12677387)
    Patents don't kill innovation, people with patents kill innovation.

  • Irony of patents for Nokia et al (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pieterh ( 196118 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @02:00PM (#12677509) Homepage
    I was at a FFII panel presentation last week. I spoke to representatives from Alcatel and British Telecom.

    Very pro-patent. They argue that patents are all that protect them from "invasion by the Chinese". I asked the woman from Alcatel whether they used Linux. Yes. In house, for much of their development. In their boxes, it's Linux everywhere.

    These companies, like Nokia, are profiting from the rising sea of open source and especially Linux, which is more and more becoming an essential ingredient of their production process.

    So it's normal that they want to "protect Linux" in some way. What they still have to face, and this is what I told them, is that their precious patents will cause the demise of the open source economy, including Linux, in Europe, and hasten the advance of competitors who do not have the same patent regimes.

    Indeed, patents in Europe are a threat to everyone including large vendors like Nokia, and even Microsoft, but people are so panicked that they can't see straight.

    Basically the software industry has been hijacked by the patent business - the EPO burocracy and patent attorneys. These people are simple parasites and if they win this battle, they will suck the life out of the software industry.

    The reason many open source projects are not being attacked today is because software patents are still settling. There are some attacks but overall the goal of patent owners is to enforce their patents against smaller commercial rivals, collect larger patent portfolios, and only attack open source projects where there is direct and immediate competition.
  • I have to say, mouth-foam aside, I have a lot of respect for the guy. There's usually a kernel (heh heh) of truth to most of his arguments. He's right in this case; software patents are bad, and exempting the Linux kernel from some of them changes nothing. Sure he's off the deep end, but he's basically on the right side, and more importantly, he's incredibly straightforward. +1, Transparent agenda.

  • Alan Cox (Score:3, Informative)

    by Conan32 ( 215411 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @02:16PM (#12677586)
    Alan Cox, the famous linux kernel guru, also had a comment on this matter a couple of days ago:
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=150685&cid=126 38576 [slashdot.org]

  • What Stallman should do instead is (Score:5, Interesting)

    by melted ( 227442 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @02:23PM (#12677638) Homepage
    What Stallman should do instead is put together a LARGE portfolio of patents based on GNU software. I'm sure there's a ton of patentable inventions in FOSS, and I'm also sure many developers wouldn't mind patenting their stuff to protect it from being ripped off by large corporations, given that FSF holds the patent and provides a perpetual, royalty free license to whoever wants to use it for developing open source, GPL/LGPL licensed software.

    Let's face it, software patents as ridiculous as they are, are here to stay. This is why to stay in the game an organization like FSF needs a large protective patent portfolio (kinda like the one Microsoft has).

    This also creates some money making opportunities for FSF, because they could sue the most vehement opponents of FOSS software pretty much at will for infringement on FSF and its contributors' "intellectual property" and request ridiculous sums of money in damages.
    • I've personally thought about this for a while.

      Where is the money going to come from? Are we to donate it all? Can we collect enough to compile a significant number? Or should this be done individually, by separate projects and people? Should all patents be assigned to the FSF?

      Basically, such a project requires an enormous fiscal paradigm shift for the community.
    • Well hopefully software patents will soon be legislated out of existence in Europe and it takes a lot of cash to get, maintain, defend and prosecute patents anyway. They're also pretty useless against companies like Microsoft and IBM unless you don't produce any software yourself. If things go badly for us in Europe though, your idea is a good one and it should be easy to make a *lot* of money parasitising the proprietary software industry.

      http://www.investors.com/breakingnews.asp?journal i d=27910020 [investors.com]
  • Because GPL software cannot benefit from the patent pledge unless it covers all GPL software. The license does not allow for software to be subject to separate licenses. If I were to fork Linux, I should not have to ask Nokia if it's okay with them for me to publish my work.
  • Hmmm... something about guns and promising not to shoot them? Let me tell you something: I think the free software community needs to build special bomb shelters located in obscure parts of the United States, Australia, and Asia. There, the community would store, in a very secure environment, all the source code to open source projects, plus printouts thereof, just in case some disaster happens in the world that renders digital information unreadable. There would be armed guards, with guns, lots and lots an

  • If Nokia really meant it... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Andy Dodd ( 701 ) <atd7NO@SPAMcornell.edu> on Monday May 30, 2005 @02:53PM (#12677812) Homepage
    They would be specifically granting the Linux kernel developers a license to their patents. Or more specifically, issuing a general unlimited-use license to use the patents in any GPL software, which is a legally binding document and not just a PR promise.

    (Maybe they have done this? In which case RMS should shut up and go home, once Nokia issues such a license they can't take it back.)

    It is possible to issue such a license - A few years ago Cornell issued such a license for a few videoconferencing patents related to their CU30 algorithm, which was initially released as an open-source implementation. Basically anyone could use the patents for free if it were in software with specific licenses, but if you wanted to use them in close-source commercial software you had to pay $$$. Also, I remember someone with a number of font-related patents (Including the underlying patent behind Microsoft's ClearType technology) did something similar - issuing a free unlimited-use license for any software that met certain open-source criteria.

  • Why Just Linux? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Carcass666 ( 539381 )

    It is rather odd that Nokia is singling out the "Linux" kernel as a benefactor of its largess. I would agree with Stallman's point (albeit poorly made) that the granting of "immunity" to the Linux kernel implies some manner of "threat" to other projects, including FOSS.

    What would Nokia's motivation be for making this announcement? I doubt they need the clout for getting patents crammed through the EU -- it's just a matter of time, unfortnately. My guess is that they have some skunkworks project using Li

  • We live in a capitalist society. What fuels our growth and success is the ability to make money. Large corporations make more money by locking out competition with patents, therfore also being able to provide jobs and health benefits and retirement plans that everyone likes. We also have free software. Great, but software patents restrict it from using xyz feature. Then we have company's who say here you go guys use it for free if your software is free.. Sounds good. It's a heck of a lot better than having

  • Mere lobbying for SW patents (Score:4, Interesting)

    by redelm ( 54142 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @03:59PM (#12678169) Homepage
    Software patents are having a tough time in the EU parlement. Nokia's move is merely an effort to remove a major objection to SW patents so they can cash in on their portfolio. RMS was actually being kind.

    I'm not against patents, nor even SW patents, for genuinely original thinking that was unlikely to be derived or released elsewhere. RSA is perhaps the best example. But many patents are far less than original or non-obvious, and that is the major problem. The US has a very bad situation (patent everything), the EU has a somewhat better but still bad situation (no SW patents).

  • Nokia didn't have a choice (Score:3, Insightful)

    by cahiha ( 873942 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @05:00PM (#12678517)
    The reason for the patent announcement is simple. Nokia has announced that they'll be shipping a Linux-based device. Once they do, they cannot assert their patents against the Linux kernel they have been shipping, otherwise they'd be violating the GPL. In fact, the same applies to any vendor that ships Linux, including Cisco, IBM, and Sun, all of which probably have more significant patent portfolios in this space than Nokia.

    Nevertheless, Nokia didn't have to choose Linux. They could have shipped BSD or QNX, for example. Someone did a cost/benefit analysis inside Nokia and found that Linux was worth it. That's a good thing. In fact, I think it's a better thing than if they had done this for publicity or other intangible reasons.

    It's true Nokia is also lobbying for software patents. I'm not convinced, however, that the two actions are necessarily related, however. Companies aren't all that organized or coordinated internally, and there are far easier arguments for them to make.

  • there be dragons out there... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by 3seas ( 184403 ) on Monday May 30, 2005 @06:00PM (#12678857) Homepage Journal
    considering software by its very nature is not patentable except by some dillusion fabracated by man, anythng that suggest otherwise, such as a promise not to use software patents against a named party, is also dillusional and in denial of the genuine nature of software. If one os going to be dillusional, who that is sane would trust them?

    Now, the earth is flat and if you sail out there, the dragons will get you.

Slashdot Top Deals

Kleeneness is next to Godelness.

Close