[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [DotGNU]flexible for users, or flexible for developers? (wasRe: Us
From: |
Boris Kolar |
Subject: |
Re: [DotGNU]flexible for users, or flexible for developers? (wasRe: User Interfaces) |
Date: |
Mon, 8 Jul 2002 14:20:11 +0200 |
> > > Ironically, for a company that goes so far as to
> > > patent a UI abstraction mechanism (ultimately what
My fear is, that somewhere along the road the DotGNU project will have two
choices: a) to fail, or b) to become "illegal" (but not
unethical). To many corporations, DotGNU is a "dangerous thing" and I see a
real possibility they'll fight it with stupid laws (like
SSSCA, patenting most basic ideas,...).
Some patents are amazingly stupid and they realy prevent innovation. Why can't
we simply ignore them? What can they do? It's an
international project, so such stupid patents and laws surely don't (and won't)
apply everywhere. I mean: who says US legislation
applies to this project?
- Re: [DotGNU]flexible for users, or flexible for developers? (was Re: User Interfaces), Barry Fitzgerald, 2002/07/06
- Re: [DotGNU]flexible for users, or flexible for developers? (was Re: User Interfaces), D.I.Freeman, 2002/07/07
- Re: [DotGNU]flexible for users, or flexible for developers? (wasRe: User Interfaces), Seth Johnson, 2002/07/08
- Re: [DotGNU]flexible for users, or flexible for developers? (wasRe: User Interfaces),
Boris Kolar <=
- [DotGNU]subject to US law? (was Re: flexible for users, or...), Norbert Bollow, 2002/07/08
- Re: [DotGNU]flexible for users, or flexible for developers? (wasRe: User Interfaces), Timothy Rue, 2002/07/08
- Re: [DotGNU]flexible for users, or flexible for developers? (wasRe: User Interfaces), David Bradley, 2002/07/09
- [DotGNU]DotGNU vs .NET (was Re: flexible for users, or...) User Interfaces), Norbert Bollow, 2002/07/09
- Re: [DotGNU]DotGNU vs .NET (was Re: flexible for users, or...) User Interfaces), Barry Fitzgerald, 2002/07/09
- Re: [DotGNU]DotGNU vs .NET (was Re: flexible for users, or...) User Interfaces), David Bradley, 2002/07/09
- Re: [DotGNU]DotGNU vs .NET (was Re: flexible for users, or...) User Interfaces), David Bradley, 2002/07/09
- Re: [DotGNU]flexible for users, or flexible for developers? (wasRe: User Interfaces), Boris Kolar, 2002/07/09
- Re: [DotGNU]flexible for users, or flexible for developers? (wasRe: User Interfaces), David Bradley, 2002/07/09
- Re: [DotGNU]flexible for users, or flexible for developers? (wasRe: User Interfaces), S11001001, 2002/07/10