Hint: Who could the FSF be afraid of enough to not make the Affero clause mandatory in GPL 3.0 and close the SaS loophole? There's all sorts of ways Google can be nasty to FSF's objectives.
Besides, the FSF doesn't have standing to sue Google over the violation of the GPL license for Java or Linux. Oracle is the only one who does for Java and kernel devs are the only ones who can for Linux. Doesn't seem likely any of the major kernel contributors will but I guess you never know.
For Java at most you'll see SFLC file some kind of amicus brief to promote some position or other. I doubt the SFLC will want to touch the linux issue with a 1000 ft pole.
ruel24 is more enthusiastic than really informed.
Oh, you know i'm not serious that they would do it. It was a point that Google isn't that friendly to open source.
As for Apple not being concerned with the competition, that might have been true once upon a time. Pretty obvious to me and probably most others that they've given HTC, Moto, & Samsung a lot of attention the past 18 months, ever since they became competition.
What he meant is that Apple doesn't concern themselves with keeping up with them in features. They certainly should be concerned when someone is stealing from them.
Well, you know, Ryan isn't exactly objective himself.
I can't necessarily disagree that Ryan isn't objective either. As stated, that's why I use several sources before forming a solid opinion. And even that is open to change as new information is presented. Florian is more of a one-trick pony IMO with a single-minded mission. Google, Motorola, IBM or anyone else that might threaten MS or Apple? Bad bad bad. Always. On every issue. Every time. That hardly looks like balanced analysis.
Sure helps explain why IBM appears willing to throw some assistance Google's way. They already went thru the alleged Microsoft-financed and directed Florian attacks.
But I still find his blog valuable, and I read it several times a week.
FWIW, Mr Mueller is not as universally trusted as some might write, with claims of his working with Microsoft on a FUD campaign against IBM, and more recently working with Microsoft again in a new campaign against Motorola. Of course he's welcome to make an income from anyone he chooses. The man has to make a living. If he's attempting to set himself up as offering fair analysis of patent matters tho, a little transparency might be in order. It's not as if he hasn't been asked what his association is. He would just rather not answer apparently.
As I said earlier, he's a good source for details that might not post at other sites, but to say he offers a fair and balanced analysis of patent suits, particularly if Apple or Microsoft is involved, doesn't hold water IMO. He may not be any more biased, nor have any greater hidden agendas than some other sources, even some I mentioned. Read from more than one and form your own opinions. Depending on FOSSPatents alone isn't going to give you an honest analysis in my view.
Anyway, 'nuff said about it.
We can go on and on about the. But Techrights is known for it's agenda. It attacks anyone who doesn't agree with it.
The Groklaw article itself is typically prejudiced as are many of them. An attorney speaking or writing about a case that isn't theirs doesn't refer to one side (that they obviously don't like) as a "monopolist". Very fair.
While I might agree with that statement, I'm not pretending to be objective on a "law" blog.
I also don't get this last one. IBM did promise to never use patents against open source. They are. So where is Mueller wrong? It also links to an article that doesn even mention him as far as I can tell.
I can't necessarily disagree that Ryan isn't objective either. As stated, that's why I use several sources before forming a solid opinion. And even that is open to change as new information is presented. Florian is more of a one-trick pony IMO with a single-minded mission. Google, Motorola, IBM or anyone else that might threaten MS or Apple? Bad bad bad. Always. On every issue. Every time. That hardly looks like balanced analysis.
Sure helps explain why IBM appears willing to throw some assistance Google's way. They already went thru the alleged Microsoft-financed and directed Florian attacks.
But I still find his blog valuable, and I read it several times a week.
There are two parts of this argument. The first, and most important is the laying out of facts. Mueller gets that part correct. The second part is the opinion. I care less for the opinions of those writing, no matter who they are. I can come to my own conclusions.
I like Mueller because he has a good grasp of the facts, and lays them out well.
There are two parts of this argument. The first, and most important is the laying out of facts. Mueller gets that part correct. The second part is the opinion. I care less for the opinions of those writing, no matter who they are. I can come to my own conclusions.
I like Mueller because he has a good grasp of the facts, and lays them out well.
We pretty much agree on that.
If you're truly interested in facts, I've got a great link for you Mel. It's a very revealing peek at what some of the Linux/Redhat and development community thinks, how Florian fits in, and how the community reacts to some of the statements made.
It so worth a read just for the information that Mr Mueller doesn't tell you.
As an aside, I was sincerely disappointed in his apparent attempts at helping Oracle craft more attacks. So was the Linux community according to posts.
Are you people crackers or something? Us iPhone users WANT Android to succeed and be better and better. Competition fules innovation. If iOS had no competition, it wouldn't move ahead so far so quickly. As a user, you WANT the competition to be successful just enough to fuel the manufacturer of your product to constantly strive to release a better product.
I believe Google has the money to just buy Oracle. Don't tempt them... Honestly, this software patent crap is so far out of hand it's ridiculous. It used to not be this way and we had lots of innovation. Software patents block innovation.
Utter BS. As an iPhone user, I don't mind competition, but I still believe in fairness. Everyone deserves a fair shake. It doesn't matter if that happens to be a rich and successful corporation. It is only fair that one is entitled to all the benefits of his/her labors. This is the very foundation of the idea of patents and other "exclusive rights," an idea enshrined in the US Constitution. And I'd argue that patents actually help innovation. Why can't Google innovate around the patent? It's easier said than done, but still, Google has some very smart people working for them and they have plenty of capital to spend.
I am amazed at the utter lack of respect for intellectual property. The person who devotes time and resources to developing a piece of technology is entitled to every ounce of benefits from it. If others want to use that technology, they have to pay the piper. Google willfully refused to license Java from Oracle. Oracle has every right to seek redress in the courts.
If you're truly interested in facts, I've got a great link for you Mel. It's a very revealing peek at what some of the Linux/Redhat and development community thinks, how Florian fits in, and how the community reacts to some of the statements made.
It so worth a read just for the information that Mr Mueller doesn't tell you.
As an aside, I was sincerely disappointed in his apparent attempts at helping Oracle craft more attacks. So was the Linux community according to posts.
Well, all of these groups have their own agendas. In fact, we all have our own agendas. If someone won't admit that, they are an outright liar.
When it comes to Google and open software organizations, I find a great deal of hypocrisy. These groups are so desperate to see Linux in any form represented, and having a possibility of becoming a majority OS, even if it isn't compatable with any real Linux distro in any way, they they will compromise their souls to see it happen.
That's what is happening now. Not only is Google stealing from Apple, Microsoft and Oracle, but they are stealing from the Linux Foundation as well. So while some can explain away this theft from companies making profits, there is no real way they can explain away Google steaing from a non profit organization or community. But will this community fight back as they have in other venue's? Likely not, because if they do, they would win, and that could prove to end the chance Linux has, even in this very bastardized form, of becoming dominant, which is something they've always predicted, and hoped would happen.
So they've remained quiet so far. Of course, there are so many that contributed to this, that if even just one person decides to take this to court, it could all be over.
But the open software community itself is so filled with hypocrisy, squabbling, and personalities who only want glory for themselves, and are willing to put down the "opposition" that the community will never get its act together.
I'm not impressed with anything they have to say on this account. I've followed it from the beginning.
Well, all of these groups have their own agendas. In fact, we all have our own agendas. If someone won't admit that, they are an outright liar.
When it comes to Google and open software organizations, I find a great deal of hypocrisy. These groups are so desperate to see Linux in any form represented, and having a possibility of becoming a majority OS, even if it isn't compatable with any real Linux distro in any way, they they will compromise their souls to see it happen.
That's what is happening now. Not only is Google stealing from Apple, Microsoft and Oracle, but they are stealing from the Linux Foundation as well. So while some can explain away this theft from companies making profits, there is no real way they can explain away Google steaing from a non profit organization or community. But will this community fight back as they have in other venue's? Likely not, because if they do, they would win, and that could prove to end the chance Linux has, even in this very bastardized form, of becoming dominant, which is something they've always predicted, and hoped would happen.
So they've remained quiet so far. Of course, there are so many that contributed to this, that if even just one person decides to take this to court, it could all be over.
But the open software community itself is so filled with hypocrisy, squabbling, and personalities who only want glory for themselves, and are willing to put down the "opposition" that the community will never get its act together.
I'm not impressed with anything they have to say on this account. I've followed it from the beginning.
You're correct that it looks like a few competing agendas are represented in the thread, but the general consensus is they don't believe what Mr. Mueller has to say, and question his motives. It would be fairly easy to perhaps dismiss their comments at just wanting to support Linux in what ever form it takes were it not for ArsTechnica holding some of the same opinions and pointing out some of the same Florian Mueller discrepancies. Things are less clearly "stolen" from Oracle if you consider the linked thread and this one.
You're correct that it looks like a few competing agendas are represented in the thread, but the general consensus is they don't believe what Mr. Mueller has to say, and question his motives. It would be fairly easy to perhaps dismiss their comments at just wanting to support Linux in what ever form it takes were it not for ArsTechnica holding some of the same opinions and pointing out some of the same Florian Mueller discrepancies. Things are less clearly "stolen" from Oracle if you consider the linked thread and this one.
Motives aren't important. That only matters if you're accused of a crime. What matters is the accuracy of the information, and while he isn't perfect, he presents the cases better than anyone else. He provides most all of the detail, while others present a small part that illustrates their agenda. What he thinks the results will be can be argued, but I have to
point out that if you go back and read his postings from a ways back, you will see that his predictions as to outcomes are more accurate than these others.
And again, remember that he's been an activist FOR open software and AGAINST software patents. So you would think that he would take a line against Apple, Oracle and Microsoft.
And again, remember that he's been an activist FOR open software and AGAINST software patents. So you would think that he would take a line against Apple, Oracle and Microsoft.
Yes you might think that, which is why his pro-Microsoft/pro-Apple bias can only be attributed to money IMO. There's every indication MS was and probably still is a client of his, which he doesn't deny. You can add Apple to the client list now IMHO.
Are you people crackers or something? Us iPhone users WANT Android to succeed and be better and better. Competition fules innovation. If iOS had no competition, it wouldn't move ahead so far so quickly. As a user, you WANT the competition to be successful just enough to fuel the manufacturer of your product to constantly strive to release a better product.
I believe Google has the money to just buy Oracle. Don't tempt them... Honestly, this software patent crap is so far out of hand it's ridiculous. It used to not be this way and we had lots of innovation. Software patents block innovation.
Ummm, Apple apparently doesn't need anything to spur innovation. Heck, they don't even use focus groups or ask their customers what they want! Maybe to Apple, that makes as much sense as a Pixar story editor asking people what they want the story to do. Nope, they write that stuff, all outta their own brains. So your thesis that competition fuels innovation misses the mark , at least in Apples case.
The patent crap is out of hand, but don't blame Apple for that. This will certainly take a while, but companies got to learn you can't swipe someone else's stuff and stick your logo on it and claim it's not copying because it has your logo on it!
Yes you might think that, which is why his pro-Microsoft/pro-Apple bias can only be attributed to money IMO. There's every indication MS was and probably still is a client of his, which he doesn't deny. You can add Apple to the client list now IMHO.
Actually, you can't add Apple to the list, because his name hasn't ever been linked to them, and you know nothing about it.
Comments
No way in hell FSF sues Google.
Hint: Who could the FSF be afraid of enough to not make the Affero clause mandatory in GPL 3.0 and close the SaS loophole? There's all sorts of ways Google can be nasty to FSF's objectives.
Besides, the FSF doesn't have standing to sue Google over the violation of the GPL license for Java or Linux. Oracle is the only one who does for Java and kernel devs are the only ones who can for Linux. Doesn't seem likely any of the major kernel contributors will but I guess you never know.
For Java at most you'll see SFLC file some kind of amicus brief to promote some position or other. I doubt the SFLC will want to touch the linux issue with a 1000 ft pole.
ruel24 is more enthusiastic than really informed.
Oh, you know i'm not serious that they would do it. It was a point that Google isn't that friendly to open source.
Can you supply links to these attorneys?
I already did. You read my links didn't you?
There's a couple of great articles I had bookmarked, and worth reading if you haven't yet.
http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2011...n-apple-1.html
http://arstechnica.com/open-source/n...redibility.ars
These have good information and opinions that help add balance to Florian's views IMO.
Add this one too if you're interested in how IBM figures into all of this.
http://www.seobythesea.com/2011/09/g...ust/#more-6675
Well, you know, Ryan isn't exactly objective himself.
Sorry a typo and not very clear, I was referring to the Java case by Sun against MS. Seems similar to me.
Yes, we got it straightened out.
That's a good Gadgetbox link. Thanks.
As for Apple not being concerned with the competition, that might have been true once upon a time. Pretty obvious to me and probably most others that they've given HTC, Moto, & Samsung a lot of attention the past 18 months, ever since they became competition.
What he meant is that Apple doesn't concern themselves with keeping up with them in features. They certainly should be concerned when someone is stealing from them.
Well, you know, Ryan isn't exactly objective himself.
I can't necessarily disagree that Ryan isn't objective either. As stated, that's why I use several sources before forming a solid opinion. And even that is open to change as new information is presented. Florian is more of a one-trick pony IMO with a single-minded mission. Google, Motorola, IBM or anyone else that might threaten MS or Apple? Bad bad bad. Always. On every issue. Every time. That hardly looks like balanced analysis.
Sure helps explain why IBM appears willing to throw some assistance Google's way. They already went thru the alleged Microsoft-financed and directed Florian attacks.
But I still find his blog valuable, and I read it several times a week.
FWIW, Mr Mueller is not as universally trusted as some might write, with claims of his working with Microsoft on a FUD campaign against IBM, and more recently working with Microsoft again in a new campaign against Motorola. Of course he's welcome to make an income from anyone he chooses. The man has to make a living. If he's attempting to set himself up as offering fair analysis of patent matters tho, a little transparency might be in order. It's not as if he hasn't been asked what his association is. He would just rather not answer apparently.
http://techrights.org/2010/04/11/flo...nd-erika-mann/
http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic....10605163439627
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-sourc...ck-in-ibm/6202
As I said earlier, he's a good source for details that might not post at other sites, but to say he offers a fair and balanced analysis of patent suits, particularly if Apple or Microsoft is involved, doesn't hold water IMO. He may not be any more biased, nor have any greater hidden agendas than some other sources, even some I mentioned. Read from more than one and form your own opinions. Depending on FOSSPatents alone isn't going to give you an honest analysis in my view.
Anyway, 'nuff said about it.
We can go on and on about the. But Techrights is known for it's agenda. It attacks anyone who doesn't agree with it.
The Groklaw article itself is typically prejudiced as are many of them. An attorney speaking or writing about a case that isn't theirs doesn't refer to one side (that they obviously don't like) as a "monopolist". Very fair.
While I might agree with that statement, I'm not pretending to be objective on a "law" blog.
I also don't get this last one. IBM did promise to never use patents against open source. They are. So where is Mueller wrong? It also links to an article that doesn even mention him as far as I can tell.
I already did. You read my links didn't you?
Not links to attorneys, but links to blogs of various people. Also after the post I responded to.
I can't necessarily disagree that Ryan isn't objective either. As stated, that's why I use several sources before forming a solid opinion. And even that is open to change as new information is presented. Florian is more of a one-trick pony IMO with a single-minded mission. Google, Motorola, IBM or anyone else that might threaten MS or Apple? Bad bad bad. Always. On every issue. Every time. That hardly looks like balanced analysis.
Sure helps explain why IBM appears willing to throw some assistance Google's way. They already went thru the alleged Microsoft-financed and directed Florian attacks.
But I still find his blog valuable, and I read it several times a week.
There are two parts of this argument. The first, and most important is the laying out of facts. Mueller gets that part correct. The second part is the opinion. I care less for the opinions of those writing, no matter who they are. I can come to my own conclusions.
I like Mueller because he has a good grasp of the facts, and lays them out well.
There are two parts of this argument. The first, and most important is the laying out of facts. Mueller gets that part correct. The second part is the opinion. I care less for the opinions of those writing, no matter who they are. I can come to my own conclusions.
I like Mueller because he has a good grasp of the facts, and lays them out well.
We pretty much agree on that.
If you're truly interested in facts, I've got a great link for you Mel. It's a very revealing peek at what some of the Linux/Redhat and development community thinks, how Florian fits in, and how the community reacts to some of the statements made.
http://lwn.net/Articles/424107/
It so worth a read just for the information that Mr Mueller doesn't tell you.
As an aside, I was sincerely disappointed in his apparent attempts at helping Oracle craft more attacks. So was the Linux community according to posts.
Are you people crackers or something? Us iPhone users WANT Android to succeed and be better and better. Competition fules innovation. If iOS had no competition, it wouldn't move ahead so far so quickly. As a user, you WANT the competition to be successful just enough to fuel the manufacturer of your product to constantly strive to release a better product.
I believe Google has the money to just buy Oracle. Don't tempt them... Honestly, this software patent crap is so far out of hand it's ridiculous. It used to not be this way and we had lots of innovation. Software patents block innovation.
Utter BS. As an iPhone user, I don't mind competition, but I still believe in fairness. Everyone deserves a fair shake. It doesn't matter if that happens to be a rich and successful corporation. It is only fair that one is entitled to all the benefits of his/her labors. This is the very foundation of the idea of patents and other "exclusive rights," an idea enshrined in the US Constitution. And I'd argue that patents actually help innovation. Why can't Google innovate around the patent? It's easier said than done, but still, Google has some very smart people working for them and they have plenty of capital to spend.
I am amazed at the utter lack of respect for intellectual property. The person who devotes time and resources to developing a piece of technology is entitled to every ounce of benefits from it. If others want to use that technology, they have to pay the piper. Google willfully refused to license Java from Oracle. Oracle has every right to seek redress in the courts.
We pretty much agree on that.
If you're truly interested in facts, I've got a great link for you Mel. It's a very revealing peek at what some of the Linux/Redhat and development community thinks, how Florian fits in, and how the community reacts to some of the statements made.
http://lwn.net/Articles/424107/
It so worth a read just for the information that Mr Mueller doesn't tell you.
As an aside, I was sincerely disappointed in his apparent attempts at helping Oracle craft more attacks. So was the Linux community according to posts.
Well, all of these groups have their own agendas. In fact, we all have our own agendas. If someone won't admit that, they are an outright liar.
When it comes to Google and open software organizations, I find a great deal of hypocrisy. These groups are so desperate to see Linux in any form represented, and having a possibility of becoming a majority OS, even if it isn't compatable with any real Linux distro in any way, they they will compromise their souls to see it happen.
That's what is happening now. Not only is Google stealing from Apple, Microsoft and Oracle, but they are stealing from the Linux Foundation as well. So while some can explain away this theft from companies making profits, there is no real way they can explain away Google steaing from a non profit organization or community. But will this community fight back as they have in other venue's? Likely not, because if they do, they would win, and that could prove to end the chance Linux has, even in this very bastardized form, of becoming dominant, which is something they've always predicted, and hoped would happen.
So they've remained quiet so far. Of course, there are so many that contributed to this, that if even just one person decides to take this to court, it could all be over.
But the open software community itself is so filled with hypocrisy, squabbling, and personalities who only want glory for themselves, and are willing to put down the "opposition" that the community will never get its act together.
I'm not impressed with anything they have to say on this account. I've followed it from the beginning.
Well, all of these groups have their own agendas. In fact, we all have our own agendas. If someone won't admit that, they are an outright liar.
When it comes to Google and open software organizations, I find a great deal of hypocrisy. These groups are so desperate to see Linux in any form represented, and having a possibility of becoming a majority OS, even if it isn't compatable with any real Linux distro in any way, they they will compromise their souls to see it happen.
That's what is happening now. Not only is Google stealing from Apple, Microsoft and Oracle, but they are stealing from the Linux Foundation as well. So while some can explain away this theft from companies making profits, there is no real way they can explain away Google steaing from a non profit organization or community. But will this community fight back as they have in other venue's? Likely not, because if they do, they would win, and that could prove to end the chance Linux has, even in this very bastardized form, of becoming dominant, which is something they've always predicted, and hoped would happen.
So they've remained quiet so far. Of course, there are so many that contributed to this, that if even just one person decides to take this to court, it could all be over.
But the open software community itself is so filled with hypocrisy, squabbling, and personalities who only want glory for themselves, and are willing to put down the "opposition" that the community will never get its act together.
I'm not impressed with anything they have to say on this account. I've followed it from the beginning.
You're correct that it looks like a few competing agendas are represented in the thread, but the general consensus is they don't believe what Mr. Mueller has to say, and question his motives. It would be fairly easy to perhaps dismiss their comments at just wanting to support Linux in what ever form it takes were it not for ArsTechnica holding some of the same opinions and pointing out some of the same Florian Mueller discrepancies. Things are less clearly "stolen" from Oracle if you consider the linked thread and this one.
http://arstechnica.com/open-source/n...moking-gun.ars
You're correct that it looks like a few competing agendas are represented in the thread, but the general consensus is they don't believe what Mr. Mueller has to say, and question his motives. It would be fairly easy to perhaps dismiss their comments at just wanting to support Linux in what ever form it takes were it not for ArsTechnica holding some of the same opinions and pointing out some of the same Florian Mueller discrepancies. Things are less clearly "stolen" from Oracle if you consider the linked thread and this one.
http://arstechnica.com/open-source/n...moking-gun.ars
Motives aren't important. That only matters if you're accused of a crime. What matters is the accuracy of the information, and while he isn't perfect, he presents the cases better than anyone else. He provides most all of the detail, while others present a small part that illustrates their agenda. What he thinks the results will be can be argued, but I have to
point out that if you go back and read his postings from a ways back, you will see that his predictions as to outcomes are more accurate than these others.
And again, remember that he's been an activist FOR open software and AGAINST software patents. So you would think that he would take a line against Apple, Oracle and Microsoft.
And again, remember that he's been an activist FOR open software and AGAINST software patents. So you would think that he would take a line against Apple, Oracle and Microsoft.
Yes you might think that, which is why his pro-Microsoft/pro-Apple bias can only be attributed to money IMO. There's every indication MS was and probably still is a client of his, which he doesn't deny. You can add Apple to the client list now IMHO.
Are you people crackers or something? Us iPhone users WANT Android to succeed and be better and better. Competition fules innovation. If iOS had no competition, it wouldn't move ahead so far so quickly. As a user, you WANT the competition to be successful just enough to fuel the manufacturer of your product to constantly strive to release a better product.
I believe Google has the money to just buy Oracle. Don't tempt them... Honestly, this software patent crap is so far out of hand it's ridiculous. It used to not be this way and we had lots of innovation. Software patents block innovation.
Ummm, Apple apparently doesn't need anything to spur innovation. Heck, they don't even use focus groups or ask their customers what they want! Maybe to Apple, that makes as much sense as a Pixar story editor asking people what they want the story to do. Nope, they write that stuff, all outta their own brains. So your thesis that competition fuels innovation misses the mark , at least in Apples case.
The patent crap is out of hand, but don't blame Apple for that. This will certainly take a while, but companies got to learn you can't swipe someone else's stuff and stick your logo on it and claim it's not copying because it has your logo on it!
Yes you might think that, which is why his pro-Microsoft/pro-Apple bias can only be attributed to money IMO. There's every indication MS was and probably still is a client of his, which he doesn't deny. You can add Apple to the client list now IMHO.
Actually, you can't add Apple to the list, because his name hasn't ever been linked to them, and you know nothing about it.
Actually, you can't add Apple to the list, because his name hasn't ever been linked to them, and you know nothing about it.
In my opinion you can add Apple.