Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ

[Paul Iadonisi <pri.marid@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 21:48, wayne wrote:

[snip]

> It isn't at all clear to me that a patch can be a "Licensed Product"
> and thus allowing the person applying the patch to the qmail
> source to be covered by the "End User" aspects of the SenderID
> license.  Even if a patch could be a product, aren't you
> creating a new product when you apply the patch?

  This follows right along with my explanation that, at least with the
GPL, there is no distinction between end user and intermediate developer
(see http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/mail-archive/msg03589.html).  I
think that any license that makes this distinction will be a problem for
the GPL and possibly lots of other FOSS licenses.  And even some
non-FOSS license (by FSF, OSI, or DFSG definitions), like the qmail
license.
-- 
-Paul Iadonisi
 Senior System Administrator
 Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist
 Ever see a penguin fly?  --  Try Linux.
 GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets