[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: New BK License Problem?
    I don't see how your wording changes anything in regards to whether the 
    effect is to restrain trade.


    FD Cami wrote:

    > Hash: SHA1
    > Hans Reiser wrote:
    > | Oh my, does this mean that if I use BitKeeper software, I am a
    > | participant in a conspiracy to restrain trade?
    > |
    > | Consider: I make reiser4 available by bitkeeper. Competitor of larry
    > | wants to use reiser4 but can't access it because access requires
    > | bitkeeper. Larry has given me an incentive to participate in
    > | discriminating against his competitors (free license for
    > bitkeeper). Am
    > | I legally liable and subject to criminal charges if a Clinton judge
    > gets
    > | the case?
    > |
    > | Hans
    > Good point... Although I think it would be unfair, for example, to
    > be able to use BitKeeper to develop a _commercial_ product that
    > would compete with BitKeeper.
    > So, _maybe_ the license should be :
    > "
    > Notwithstanding any other terms in this License, this License is not
    > available to You if You and/or your employer develop, produce,
    > sell, and/or resell a closed source (GPL, like CVS) product which
    > contains substantially similar capabilities of the BitKeeper Software,
    > or, in the reasonable opinion of BitMover, competes with the BitKeeper
    > Software.
    > "
    > But of course, who am I to decide... Larry ? ;-)
    > FD Cami

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:0.041 / U:4.284 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site