From: | Bruce Perens <bruce(at)perens(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org, MJ Ray <mjr(at)phonecoop(dot)coop> |
Subject: | Re: are we being honest about legal resources? |
Date: | 2008-03-12 16:39:24 |
Message-ID: | 47D8073C.2070005@perens.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
Thread: | |
Lists: | spi-general |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> It's pretty clear that there are now two camps that are not
>> particularly interested in each other's project, which hasn't really
>> been the case with SPI until recently.
> This really isn't true at all. You should consider that at least 4 of
> the board members are not "Debian" people, although they are involved
> with Debian. (I was firmly reminded of this on a chat with Jimmy).
What made me think that was the case was this statement from Josh Berkus:
> The rest of the PostgreSQL people stopped reading the "Copyright
issues" thread several days ago.
>> but we weren't "The Debian Company".
> And?
This is in regard to "The PostgreSQL Company", of course. I saw an
identification of a block of the board as "the PostgreSQL people" plus
the commercial interest, I found it disquieting and felt I should
register that with you. I don't suggest an action item.
But this is getting very far from the reason I opened this dialogue.
Which is that I perceive that Open Source projects - not just Debian -
block themselves due to an IMO naive interpretation of the implications
of the multiple copyright holder problem. I simply did not want SPI to
contribute to Debian's continuing to block itself on this issue by
repeating the (IMO) naive interpretation to Debian, and do not otherwise
see a need to force the issue on Debian.
Regarding my concern with legal issues, it has been correctly pointed
out that I have not been called to the bar. I have presented at an
American Bar Association conference, and have keynoted legal conferences
operated by U. Washington, and Olswang (London), the last in November.
This is because I work with attorneys on the legal issues of Open
Source, both as an advisor to attorneys and their customers, and an
expert witness. So, I do consider this particular problem a domain in
which I can legitimately work - always with the cooperation of an attorney.
And although I want to solve the global problem, I am only concerned
that Debian is properly aware of its options and am willing to leave it
at that. I wasn't trying to represent Debian, and didn't appreciate
Ian's ad-hominem.
Thanks
Bruce
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jimmy Kaplowitz | 2008-03-12 16:42:01 | Re: are we being honest about legal resources? |
Previous Message | Bdale Garbee | 2008-03-12 16:20:09 | Re: are we being honest about legal resources? |