Mailing List Archive

> I'm open to suggestions about what action (if any) the web-apps herd should
> take.


How about masking it? or puting up a disclaimer stating the same as shown on

http://www.literatigroup.com/versusmambo/

It seems that the second solution would be much better, since it would
free Gentoo of any sort of legal actions, I'm no legal expert somebody
back me up, and let the user know what's going on. It's like having
enviromental organizations sue gas pump owners instead of the big oil
companies :). Gentoo is just a gas pump that lets you fill in the
gas, it's up to you to choose if you want to do it or not.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

> I'm open to suggestions about what action (if any) the web-apps herd should
> take.

I suppose you could put a disclaimer in, along the lines of the Sun
Java license (i.e. some text and then "are you sure you agree to this:
Y/N"). It sounds awfully like another SCO to me, and I don't see how
they can really go after the users (especially those of us in the UK).
Better to be safe than sorry though for the present and then see how
it fans out over the next couple of weeks.

I don't think it should be removed from portage altogether though,
just because a company claims that some of the code is theirs
(otherwise we'd have to remove the Linux kernel as well).

Paul

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 19:19:56 +0000, Paul Waring <pwaring@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm open to suggestions about what action (if any) the web-apps herd should
> > take.
>
> I suppose you could put a disclaimer in, along the lines of the Sun
> Java license (i.e. some text and then "are you sure you agree to this:
> Y/N"). It sounds awfully like another SCO to me, and I don't see how
> they can really go after the users (especially those of us in the UK).
> Better to be safe than sorry though for the present and then see how
> it fans out over the next couple of weeks.
>
> I don't think it should be removed from portage altogether though,
> just because a company claims that some of the code is theirs
> (otherwise we'd have to remove the Linux kernel as well).
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

Heh, this ass-clown has his "offices" down the street from me. In
fact, I think I used to deliver pizzas to that address in college.

Getting to the point, I'd think something like the Sun Java SDK (where
you have to explicitly download it, and put it into
/usr/portage/distfiles), in addition to adding a warning in the ebuild
is more than enough. Let's face it, if people want the software, they
will install it, portage or otherwise. We arn't responsible for their
actions.

Mike Doty

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Friday 17 September 2004 12:58 pm, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> Anyone want to comment on this?
>
> http://www.literatigroup.com/versusmambo/
>
> I'm open to suggestions about what action (if any) the web-apps herd should
> take.

I'd say no action at all... SCO has been threatening the same thing with
regards to the Linux kernel code, yet we do not have a disclaimer on it or a
Sun JDK style "grab it yourself" block.

If they start slinging successful lawsuits, then that becomes a different
story. But for now, I have to assume that he has made a website and
fabricated a legal threat. I would give equal weight to the argument that
the Mambo team makes on their behalf[1]. So, until something actually
happens, I don't think we should do anything. Just my $.02

Cheers,

-C

[1] -
http://mamboserver.com/The_News/News/Statement_regarding_Furthermore.com/

--
Corey Shields
Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team and Devrel Team
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields

On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:06:42 -0500, Corey Shields <cshields@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Friday 17 September 2004 12:58 pm, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> > Anyone want to comment on this?
> >
> > http://www.literatigroup.com/versusmambo/
> >
> > I'm open to suggestions about what action (if any) the web-apps herd should
> > take.
>
>... SCO has been threatening the same thing with

I vote no action. Scare tactics have been tried before. Didn't IETF
just shoot down a msft proposal that would give them IP leverage? I'd
consider this the bluff of an enterprising little person that should
be thrown in jail for perjury.

"7. Robert Castley, Mambo Project Manager, 8/17/04 shifts
responsibility for the matter to users of Mambo OS. He said, "Mambo
can not be party to any disputes between individuals or companies
concerning the use of Mambo.""

translation: someone pissed in my wheaties and i'm going to sue the
world to get a new box. It seems like they're threatening mambo users
without any proof/grounds. When the first lawsuit flies and gets shot
down, I'll laugh. Mambo is GPL. If these guys honestly had any claim
to any code/idea/whatever they should have done something about it at
the time instead of a year later.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list