You're also welcome to call me at 510-375-0820 if you want more truth! I am in Norway at the moment, so watch the time zone. That's a GSM phone, Sourcelabs will pick up the bill.
How the hell can rumours spread when the darned subject PUBLISHES HIS PHONE NUMBER ON THE INTERNET. This is no fun at all!:-)
FYI:
10 times as many people are willing to converse with me on slashdot as to send me an email.
10 times as many people are willing to email me as call on the phone.
So, the phone calls end up being managable. This is a social phenomenon worthy of study. Something about the relative intimacy of various forms of communication and willingness to engage in them.
I have this self-imposed job of helping to ease the future course of Open Source by attempting to solve problems in its way like the software patent issue. A big part of that is being an "opinion leader", which is writing stuff that other people read and, hopefully, agree with. Getting attention for such stuff means courting the press like Computerworld (which did not create the cited article but is carrying a LinuxWorld Online story) and Slashdot. The press is capricious. They don't cover what I want them to cover. They must be pandered to and babied, cajoled, you get the picture. Being a notable person whom they will recognize and cover - regardless of the content - is something you have to do just to get the real issues covered. That doesn't mean we have to like it.
if this guy is most famous (hey, I'm paraphrasing TFA) for getting fired, then what's his next move?
Hm. Perhaps I should be deported or something:-) Maybe tried for treason. I'll think of something:-)
It's somewhat frustrating that internal conflict of Open Source always makes more news than the outward-facing work that I'm doing. There have been much more important issues that I was unable to get Slashdot to cover.
SPI and Debian have always been a home of personalities and strongly-held opinions, and I have no shortage of either:-) . But for me, this was really a matter of where I can and can't put my time. Raising my son is #1. After that, there's the most important issues of Open Source at the moment - and I judge the software patenting problem to be the biggest of those right now. SPI and Debian, unfortunately, are lower on my list. So, no, I should not have run.
Ever hear me on the air? Not much time for ham radio right now, either. I made it to Dayton and turned down a position on the TAPR board. So much to do, so little Bruce. Sigh.
I missed oh, 8 out of 12 board meetings due to being on airplanes (doing stuff for Open Source) and otherwise being busy. And that really pissed people off. I am working on things like the software patents issue and have prioritized that over stuff like SPI. Although I am spending time on my son and view that as my highest priority, I have not retired and am still working full-time. Half of my paid time for Sourcelabs is to work on Open Source issues of my own choice under my own direction. The other half is to work on Open Source issues for Sourcelabs customers.
I think working full-time on Open Source issues of my own choice may be in my future. I'm not sure when, but am reasonably sure I could get that funded now.
This is the same company in which Google and Apple are partners with Microsoft, correct? Did you just kinda forget that part?
Oh no, I haven't. I didn't expect much of apple. I'm disappointed in Google and unfortunately I don't know anyone there but Chris Dibona so I don't know what to do about that.
An infringement on "IP". This is why "IP" is a bad phrase to use. Do you mean infringing on a patent? Well, that's pretty easy to do in a very different product, just by coming up with the same idea independently. Or do you mean infringing on copyright in a real clone? That's much worse ethically.
I checked just now, and have made $5.36 so far. That is about what the site normally makes on is other articles, this particular article is not getting ad hits. The site has operating expenses of $500/month for the paid editor and the dedicated server, and if it breaks even this month that will be the first time in 10 years.
Unfortunately, I can't control slashdot's editing, only that on Technocrat.net
Please be in Brussels on July 12 when the software patent law comes up for consideration again. Maybe you can help to save Italy for us. You can read about what's going on at NoSoftwarePatents.com and FFII.org
The patents in the patent commons are not pledged for defensive use. They are only patents that we are allowed to use without being sued.
Indeed, some of the patents in the patent commons can be withdrawn at any time. It seems to be a half-hearted effort. Why? Look at the companies on OSDL's board. They are the ones that most profit from software patenting.
There is another project called Open Innovation Network, started by Novell, that is supposed to contain patents that really are dedicated for defensive use.
I just checked on the google adsense site. I made $2.80 so far today.
Technocrat.net has operating expenses of $500/month for the paid editor and the dedicated server. It never has broken even so far, over 10 years of operation. It may break even this month, but it won't be from this particular article, which isn't getting ad hits.
Regarding your argument... uh-oh, you didn't really make an argument. Just a couple of statements. Maybe if you tried to marshal an argument and told us where we could find your patent case there would be something to talk about.
Recognition was posed as a model for Open Source developer motivation before there was much business involved in using Open Source. These days, a lot of Open Source writing is for use by the business where the software has been written, and since that business gets its income from doing something else than writing software, it is economicaly best for them to share the effort of writing and maintaining the software with other, similar businesses.
And regarding the gratification from writing a "duplicate", it doesn't work that way. Consider Firefox, or Apache: not duplicates of anything, although there are other products in the category. Or Linux: it works the way the POSIX standard says it should, so it shares a common interface with Unix. But everything else about it is different.
As far as I'm aware, the way you prove that you are "first to invent" is by filing a patent containing an invention date within the last 364 days. Nobody asks you for evidence before they grant the patent, and disproving your stated date in court would be expensive and possibly fruitless.
The alternative would be first-to-file, in which case you would not be considered to have made the invention until the patent filing date. The problem with first-to-invent is that it allows you to eavesdrop on the mailing list of a standards group, and file pre-dated patents on the stuff going into the standard.
IBM didn't pledge their patents for defensive use, anyway. They just said we could use 500 patents, not all of value to us (one is for setscrews) out of their hundreds of thousands and that they would not sue us for that. There is another entity called Open Innovation Network started by Novell that actually has patents pledged for defensive use.
Bruce Perens sells some sort of patent insurance, so he has a profit motive to FUD this issue.
I have never sold patent insurance, nor am I associated with the company that attempted to create a patent insurance business any longer. It might have helped protect us if that business had actually been able to sell patent insurance, but that has not worked so far.
OK, so some guy gets sued for writing FOSS by some big corp and loses. How are they going to prevent him from writing even more "patent-infringing" FOSS? Jail him? Kill him? Lobotomise him? Seems to me that things have taken a left turn into the Twilight Zone.
Generally, the settlement would require the developer to sign a covenant not to write more software in that category, at the very least. This has already happened in patent cases. If you violate the covenant, you get sued again for more money.
Also, it's not necessary to jail someone if you can make him poor and remove his capability to work.
So, you think you can escape this by moving to Australia? Wrong. The US has an intellectual property treaty with Australia. And most other nations. But why should you have to be a fugitive in the first place. Why should you not be able to live in plain sight where you choose?
The problem with that project is that it attempts to engage people who would be best served if a patent was not awarded in improving the quality of the patent. It's not in their interest.
Well, patents are a great mechanism for lying to investors. Every one says you have a monopoly on something, and usually you don't. Indeed, 95% of patent claims have documented prior art in any college library these days. And the last thing any new company that makes real products needs is litigation. So, maybe the solution is for investors to wise up.
Get out of the "stealing ideas" mindset. You can steal implementations, and in the case of software, those things are covered by copyright and thus the victim can use the law against you without resorting to patents. The problem with "stealing ideas" is that lots of people have the same idea independently. And if you look closely at the enabling law of the patent system, you're not supposed to be able to patent ideas at all. Unfortunately, with software, that part of the system has failed.
Slashdot Mirror
How the hell can rumours spread when the darned subject PUBLISHES HIS PHONE NUMBER ON THE INTERNET. This is no fun at all! :-)
FYI:
10 times as many people are willing to converse with me on slashdot as to send me an email.
10 times as many people are willing to email me as call on the phone.
So, the phone calls end up being managable. This is a social phenomenon worthy of study. Something about the relative intimacy of various forms of communication and willingness to engage in them.
Thanks
Bruce
I guess it's a human-interest story.
I have this self-imposed job of helping to ease the future course of Open Source by attempting to solve problems in its way like the software patent issue. A big part of that is being an "opinion leader", which is writing stuff that other people read and, hopefully, agree with. Getting attention for such stuff means courting the press like Computerworld (which did not create the cited article but is carrying a LinuxWorld Online story) and Slashdot. The press is capricious. They don't cover what I want them to cover. They must be pandered to and babied, cajoled, you get the picture. Being a notable person whom they will recognize and cover - regardless of the content - is something you have to do just to get the real issues covered. That doesn't mean we have to like it.
Thanks
Bruce
Hm. Perhaps I should be deported or something :-) Maybe tried for treason. I'll think of something :-)
It's somewhat frustrating that internal conflict of Open Source always makes more news than the outward-facing work that I'm doing. There have been much more important issues that I was unable to get Slashdot to cover.
Bruce
Ever hear me on the air? Not much time for ham radio right now, either. I made it to Dayton and turned down a position on the TAPR board. So much to do, so little Bruce. Sigh.
I think working full-time on Open Source issues of my own choice may be in my future. I'm not sure when, but am reasonably sure I could get that funded now.
Bruce
Bruce
It's great that there's so much Buzz about Debian!
Bruce
Oh no, I haven't. I didn't expect much of apple. I'm disappointed in Google and unfortunately I don't know anyone there but Chris Dibona so I don't know what to do about that.
Bruce
Bruce
Microsoft generally does offensive actions through proxies like SCO or, shall I say, Intellectual Ventures.
I checked just now, and have made $5.36 so far. That is about what the site normally makes on is other articles, this particular article is not getting ad hits. The site has operating expenses of $500/month for the paid editor and the dedicated server, and if it breaks even this month that will be the first time in 10 years.
Unfortunately, I can't control slashdot's editing, only that on Technocrat.net
Bruce
Bruce
Indeed, some of the patents in the patent commons can be withdrawn at any time. It seems to be a half-hearted effort. Why? Look at the companies on OSDL's board. They are the ones that most profit from software patenting.
If you want to understand the truth about the patent commons, start at LWN's coverage of their disclosures.
There is another project called Open Innovation Network, started by Novell, that is supposed to contain patents that really are dedicated for defensive use.
Bruce
China has recently entered into an intellectual property treaty with the U.S.
Bruce
Technocrat.net has operating expenses of $500/month for the paid editor and the dedicated server. It never has broken even so far, over 10 years of operation. It may break even this month, but it won't be from this particular article, which isn't getting ad hits.
Regarding your argument... uh-oh, you didn't really make an argument. Just a couple of statements. Maybe if you tried to marshal an argument and told us where we could find your patent case there would be something to talk about.
Bruce
If you'd like to learn more about this, read The Emerging Economic Paradigm of Open Source
And regarding the gratification from writing a "duplicate", it doesn't work that way. Consider Firefox, or Apache: not duplicates of anything, although there are other products in the category. Or Linux: it works the way the POSIX standard says it should, so it shares a common interface with Unix. But everything else about it is different.
Thanks
Bruce
The alternative would be first-to-file, in which case you would not be considered to have made the invention until the patent filing date. The problem with first-to-invent is that it allows you to eavesdrop on the mailing list of a standards group, and file pre-dated patents on the stuff going into the standard.
Bruce
Bruce
I have never sold patent insurance, nor am I associated with the company that attempted to create a patent insurance business any longer. It might have helped protect us if that business had actually been able to sell patent insurance, but that has not worked so far.
Bruce
Generally, the settlement would require the developer to sign a covenant not to write more software in that category, at the very least. This has already happened in patent cases. If you violate the covenant, you get sued again for more money.
Also, it's not necessary to jail someone if you can make him poor and remove his capability to work.
So, you think you can escape this by moving to Australia? Wrong. The US has an intellectual property treaty with Australia. And most other nations. But why should you have to be a fugitive in the first place. Why should you not be able to live in plain sight where you choose?
Bruce
Regarding my use of "they", I don't really have anything to do with this product or the people who would call you. I do other stuff at Sourcelabs.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce
Bruce
Bruce