Talk:Software patents and free software

message: I'm done for today, but I'll try to find more refs and more free software people and organisations another day to back up the claim that opposition to software patents is widespread in the free software community.  If others have such refs, please note them here or add them to the article.  And thanks to User:Edcolins for some initial review and for tagging sentences that need references. Gronky 17:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Particularly, I remember hearing an audio recording of a talk that Alan Cox gave that was against software patents, but I can't find that now.  The venue was somewhere in the UK or maybe the west of Ireland.  As for the year, I could only say it was between 2000 and 2005.  IIRC "open source" was in the title - I seem to remember starting by saying he'd've prefered "free software". Gronky 17:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: More refs needed

message: The MS-Novell deal of 2006 should get a paragraph at least.  Gronky 21:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Novell deal needs mentioning 

message: The introduction should be balanced and should present the various positions on the subject, including the position of the proprietary software (non-free software) "community", companies or developers (e.g. the position of Microsoft on the subject - see WP:NPOV). --Edcolins 20:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have time to do a good job but I just made some improvements.  I removed some vague statements and added a bit about MS's opinion.  The intro is now overly focussed on MS now though, so more text is needed. Gronky 17:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, it is better now. --Edcolins 18:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I think this is an incompleteness issue, rather than a NPOV one. MS seems to be equally s/w-patent anti, so the topic is not that much about OS vs proprietary, but comptech role/business differences betw h/w dealers vs. s/w dealers. Said: Rursus (☻) 08:26, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  How is M$ in any way anti-SW patent? They have employed vast efforts (like (co-)sponsoring supportive "studies") and sneaky lobbying tactics (including posing as SME) to try to push the EU's SW patent bill into law. As usual, their actions contradict their words in the most obscene way. 217.230.43.254 (talk) 20:18, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Right now, we have a link that is supposedly for "IP Innovation LLC", but when I follow it I arrive at the web page for "IP Innovations". Are they the same? 62.181.255.64 09:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Probably. These so-called "businesses" (read: parasites) change their names whenever it suits them, like to evade public criticism or law enforcement. Like Diebold (now "Premier Election Solutions"). 217.230.43.254 (talk) 20:23, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  IP Innovation LLC or IP Innovations? 

message: The study by (now-dead) Open Source Risk Management which found that the Linux kernel could potentially violate 283 not-proven-in-court patents, should be mentioned.  Anyone got some good links which can be used as the basis for this? --Gronky 12:30, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should mention the OSRM "283 patents" study 

message: Google have a lot of patents and do a lot of work with free software, but the article says nothing about whether they've made a patent non-agression pledge to free software.  Does anyone have any info about this?  Thanks. --Gronky (talk) 13:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google patent promise? 

message: There's a notable comment here from Fraser-Moleketi, the South African minister of public service and administration, criticising software patents and praising free software:
:http://www.tectonic.co.za/?p=2304
But I can't decide how to mention it in Wikipedia.  Should it go in this article, or in the software patent debate article.  Hmmm. --Gronky (talk) 01:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  South Africa minister quote 

message: Just to let you know. The purpose of selecting an article is both to point readers to the article and to highlight it to potential contributors. It will remain on the portal for a week or so. The previous selected article was Wireshark - a packet sniffer which was previously called Ethereal.
For other interesting free software articles, you can take a look at the archive of PF's selectees. --Gronky (talk) 12:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm glad to see this article has attracted attention while being highlighted on Portal:Free_software.  Meanwhile, the new selectee is gNewSense, a GNU/Linux distribution which focusses on being completely free-as-in-freedom.  gNewSense recently celebrated it's 2.0 release "Delta H". --Gronky (talk) 08:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Portal:Free software]]: SP+FS is now the selected article 

message: In response to a question by User:Gronky on my talk page...
I tagged this article with two templates:  and . I used  for a number of reasons, the most significant of these being the short, choppy blocks of three or four sentences, each under their own heading. A number of sections in the article read like proseline. The more significant tag, however, was . This article is absolutely full of references (a good thing!), but it is fairly short. Every sentence has a reference on it, which is good for a featured article but unnecessary for an article of this size. Furthermore, some of the sections (like "Positions from the community" and "Infringement claims") are oversummarized and need additional details. I believe that we could squeeze some more content out of the references we have now.
Of course, feel free to revert me if you disagree. « Aaron Rotenberg « Talk « 02:37, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't disagree at all :-)  Since I wrote large parts of the article, it's sometimes hard for me to see what's wrong with it, so I'm always interested in constructive criticism.  I'll look into expanding the short sections, particularly the two you highlighted. --Gronky (talk) 08:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion and cleanup 

message: Says it's invite only content. (on blogger) Somebody should do something about it. 85.131.30.249 (talk) 12:35, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Link replaced Jdgeenen (talk) 21:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference 35 is not public

message: I removed this block of text because it seems much broader than the topic of this article, and the information isn't very accurate.  I tried to reword it, but couldn't find anything that would be useful for this article.  I may try again later, but everyone's welcome to try :-)
Patent holders can require infringers of their patents to take out a license to continue using an invention covered by the patent, which may or may not require payment of a fee. Otherwise, the infringer must stop infringing the patent, possibly by removing or modifying the patented feature so that the product no longer infringes, or challenging the validity of overly-broad patents (such as the infamous Amazon 1-Click patent) and having them wholly or partly rejected, even if they have been around for years. This possibility may be easier with software than other types of inventions since computer program often perform many different functions or a similar result may be achieved in a different, non-infringing manner. Nevertheless, the software may not be useful without the patented feature.
.Gronky (talk) 17:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Patent licensing section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Software patents and free software. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.zdnet.com.au/ubuntu-red-hat-reject-microsoft-patent-deal-339278741.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:33, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified