Re: [PROPOSAL] Open Source certification

From: Will Lowe <harpo(at)UDel(dot)Edu>
> But aren't the people who form the board of such an organization then
> liable for the damages of such a legal suit?

The corporation is itself liable for monetary patent infringement damages.
The board is subject to criminal prosecution in the case of munitions exports,
but if they aren't exporting crypto software from the U.S. they aren't going
to run into this. This is the position that FSF and SPI are _now_in_ regarding
the software those corporations own.

> Obviously, the problem is with the export restrictions and the patents
> themselves, but I don't know how to fight those.

It's a really big fight, but we have to do it, or free software is going to
become _useless_ for new technologies. Accepting license provisions
that support patent litigation and export-law prosecution is sort of giving
up at the start.

Thanks

Bruce

> The corporation is itself liable for monetary patent infringement damages.
Who's liable when the corporation doesn't have the monetary resources to
pay damages? SPI doesn't have the assets to pay off a large patent
infringment liability.

> It's a really big fight, but we have to do it, or free software is going to
> become _useless_ for new technologies.
I say again: How?

Will

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| harpo(at)udel(dot)edu lowe(at)cis(dot)udel(dot)edu lowe(at)debian(dot)org |
| http://www.cis.udel.edu/~lowe/ |
| PGP Public Key: http://www.cis.udel.edu/~lowe/index.html#pgpkey |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| You think you're so smart, but I've seen you naked |
| and I'll prob'ly see you naked again ... |
| --The Barenaked Ladies, "Blame It On Me" |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------