Re: [pgsql-www] Software Patents

In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com (Thomas Hallgren) transmitted:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>> but do we cast a shadow across the project by taking an
>> 'anti-patent' stance when one of our major contributors most
>> probably has *several*?
>>
> Fujitsu is a commercial entity, forced to play by the game stipulated
> by current patent laws. That's not mean that they love their
> patents. I think it is very far fetched to assume that Fujitsu (or
> anyone else) would be offended if we state that we don't like software
> patents.
>
> I also strongly feel that the PostgreSQL community should express
> their opinion freely. Speculations on what opinions a sponsor might or
> might not have should really have no significance at all.

This furthermore points to the "right answer" on this being that
individuals that want to express their displeasure about certain
political matters ought to simply do so.

Expecting the PostgreSQL project to "have an opinion" when it's not an
individual is a bit silly.
--
output = ("cbbrowne" "@" "gmail.com")
http://linuxdatabases.info/info/finances.html
"I withdraw my claim that rpm is proprietary -- my objections were
based on the documentation for the version of rpm (2.2.6) that I used
as a documentation source when writing makepkg and xrpm."
-- david parsons