Homer <usenet@xxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> Verily I say unto thee, that Linonut spake thusly:
>> * Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>>> Nearly every free software license meets the conditions of RAND,
>>> and is therefore a RAND license. Whether a given RAND license is
>>> compatible with free software or not depends on the particular
>>> license the owner of that thing chooses to use.
>>
>> Exactly.
>
> RAND is an indefinite term that may infringe other conditions depending
> on the definite terms stipulated, as clearly demonstrated by the recent
> exposure of Moonlight on Groklaw. Of course Smith /knew/ this before he
> started his little FUD injection, by presenting RAND as some innocuous;
> generic term that doesn't differ between one licensor and the next, and
> then comparing MS's monopolistic conditions to the GPL for vindication.
>
> IOW, he's trying to manipulate us into believing that because Destroying
> Angels and Golden Chanterelles are both mushrooms, then the former can't
> be deadly poisonous.
>
I've never claimed that RAND was a licence, this is another Timmy
injection of falsehood, and again, precisely why I have him kfiled.
--
| mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |
|
|