[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 06:48:06 +0000 Peter Lloyd-Jones <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Neil > > Thanks for your letter, yes I am aware that you have been in contact with Bob. > However what I fail to see is why this is relevant in this case. (I am not > implying your input was not important, but I do not think it has to do with > the current problem). Surely the problem is that KAM industries is claiming > that they invented the system used (by both them and JMRI) to talk between > the computer and the command station. And they go on to say that Bob must > pay them a royalty for every free copy of JMRI which has been distributed. Whatever happens with the patents, KAM are also attacking JMRI via their own licence: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/archive/2006/11/msg00272.html A particularly interesting part of the story is that Matt Katzer and KAM Industries have been shipping JMRI decoder definitions as part of their "Decoder Commander" product, without giving JMRI any credit for it. For information on some of the evidence for that, please see: http://jmri.sf.net/k/copycomparison.html Matt is claiming that copyright law doesn't apply to his misuse of the JMRI decoder definitions, and that JMRI isn't protected against his infringement by our license: http://jmri.sf.net/k/updates.html#2006-09-27 That is why this isn't a story just of software patents, the licence is fundamental to the battle and, IMHO, it is a very weak foundation. :-( -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpuozA6tAqFY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html