News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Theo de Raadt on LLVM license change by fungos on Saturday October 01, 2016 @11:46AM (#12618321)
Sure, but I see the idea as a kind of boycott/protest. I disagree with patents, mainly software patents, consequently I will never use a license that consider patents.
Re:Theo de Raadt on LLVM license change by cyphar on Saturday October 01, 2016 @01:24PM (#12618863)
That's not how laws work. At all. Even the GPLv3 (authored by one of the biggest activists against software patents) has clauses relating to software patents -- because they are a legitimate threat to software freedom and need to be addressed. Just because you don't like patents doesn't make the problem go away -- in fact by ignoring it you're making the problem worse because then your code's license has no protection for your users.
Re:Theo de Raadt on LLVM license change by icebraining on Saturday October 01, 2016 @12:46PM (#12618656)
But a boycott is supposed to help the cause, no? All you're doing is preventing a lot of people from using your code from fear that you'll sue them - some of which who might end up using an alternative from a company that holds and supports patents.
Re:Theo de Raadt on LLVM license change by yarrel on Saturday October 01, 2016 @01:10PM (#12618778)
That's not a boycott. That's a capitulation.