Slashdot Mirror
Linspire/Microsoft Agreement Useless to Users
Stephen Samuel writes "Groklaw host PJ has dissected the 'patent peace' agreement between Linspire and Microsoft, and has determined that what Linspire agreed to is next to useless for many users. Essentially, under the agreement Linspire software is almost unusable: 'You can't share the software with others, pass it on with the patent promise, modify your own copy, or even use it for an "unauthorized" purpose, whatever that means in a software context. You must pay Linspire for the software, but then the "covenant" says to use Linux, you must also pay Microsoft. That payment doesn't cover upgrades. Linspire said it was absorbing the initial fees, but I don't know about upgrades. New functionality means you lose your coverage or presumably must pay again.'"
Linspire should just expire.
3 things about computers: they're alive, they're self-aware, and they hate your guts.
Isn't it much more like Linspire/Microsoft Agreement makes Linspire useless? Additionally, that is an understatement also since the general idea of useless is that you won't get anything good from it. In this scenario, it should be Linspire/MS Agreement Toxic to Users.
How about objective analysis instead?
How about reading the article and point out some actual errors in it?
I did, and most points she makes seem valid to me...
What facts did you use for your objective analysis of groklaw?
Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/