Re: Plans for 2.8 - GNOME Managed Language Services?

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Sat, Mar 27, 2004 at 12:35:14PM -0500, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> > > MY understanding that all ECMA bits are unencumbered insofar as they
> > > *must* be licensed under RAND terms. Is my understanding incorrect?
> > 
> > One problem is that RAND is still GPL-incompatible. That's why you can't
> > ship MP3 or MPEG4 codecs licensed under the GPL, even if you buy a
> > patent license.
> 
> RAND + Royalty Free in the case of ECMA.
> 
> In any case, am wondering why RAND is incompatible with the GPL?  This
> is news to me, and a google search did not reveal anything, nor could I
> find anything about this on the gnu.org site.   

  Check with Perens or anybody who worked on the Patent Policy Working
Group at W3C, RAND was rejected for future W3C specs due to those kind
of problems.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/