From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 29 May 2002 10:13:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 29 May 2002 10:13:00 -0400 Received: from vena.lwn.net ([206.168.112.25]:39431 "HELO eklektix.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 29 May 2002 10:12:59 -0400 Message-ID: <20020529141300.30309.qmail@eklektix.com> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: business models [was patent stuff] From: corbet-lk@lwn.net (Jonathan Corbet) In-Reply-To: Your message of "29 May 2002 14:15:26 BST." <1022678126.9255.182.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 08:13:00 -0600 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan said: > I would worry much more about the million odd patents IBM have, where > IBM have no general statement of this nature than the Red Hat ones. > Perhaps once the Red Hat statement is published IBM can be persuaded to > show willing ? For what it's worth, the Red Hat statement is at: http://www.redhat.com/legal/patent_policy.html No patent enforcement against you if you're using a Red Hat-approved open source license - their list does not include BSD. jon Jonathan Corbet Executive editor, LWN.net corbet@lwn.net