Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:54:57 +0200, Mart van de Wege wrote:
>
>> Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:44:43 +0100, Ben wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree that Mono has some practical advantages, but why are we making
>>>> free implementations of it instead of a competing specification, which
>>>> cannot be attacked by litigation?
>>>
>>> First of all, that's impossible. Any code and implementation runs the risk
>>> of violating someones patents. There's just no way to know if any piece of
>>> code you write doesn't infringe on a patent.
>>
>> But, but, but...
>>
>> Last week you Microsoft guys were telling us there were no patents to
>> infringe on at all.
>
> No, I was saying that. And I said, there are no known patents by
> microsoft, not that there aren't any patents by anyone.
>
Suuure.
You always have a weaselly way out handy, haven't you?
Why should I believe someone who got caught in several successive lies
within hours?
Mart
--
"We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes."
--- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.
|
|
