[clug] Your Best arguments please

Damien Elmes clug at repose.cx
Tue Aug 12 12:25:30 EST 2003

Kim Holburn <kim.holburn at anu.edu.au> writes:

>>Requiring 3 separate tools to do the same thing is
>>overkill, but by simple]y saying things must be "open", it leaves a lot
>>of scope for companies to win contracts while still keeping things
>>closed - out of date documentation, techniques designed to lock out
>>unauthorised clients, etc.
> Examples?

Things like "open" standards which use patented methods, "data escrow"
like .net/.gnu where it's possible for proprietory vendors to stay
within the legal requirements of the GPL, but fail to comply with its
intended spirit - like the dynamic binding problem. I'm just saying
without careful wording, businesses will always find a way to work
around the restrictions.

Regarding future lock-out, the legislation would need to ensure the
requirement held for product updates and not just the product or
proposal at the time of consideration, for example.

Damien Elmes

More information about the linux mailing list