Rtlinux and GPL


Robert Schwebel

On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Ken Emmons, Jr. wrote:
> Last I heard FSM Labs was working with the GPL people on it and there
> didn't seem to be a big problem. It seems like a lot of people are
> getting over worked up about it.

It's much more than that - see my other post. Till now FSM-Labs did not do any official statement to the question if they think RTAI falls under the patented process. They have been asked several times, never any answer. Even Lineo payed for a patent license recently, although it does not look like they are using RTL sometimes (their engineers are working on RTAI).
So we have the situation that you have to pay royalities if you are using a LGPLed project (RTAI) to a company that doesn't have to do anything with RTAI. Nice, isn't it?

| Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel |
| Linux Solutions for Science and Industry |
| Braunschweiger Straße 79, 31134 Hildesheim, Germany |
| Phone: +49-5121-28619-0 Fax: +49-5121-28619-4 |

LinuxPLC mailing list
[email protected]

Curt Wuollet

Well, It is a big deal. The way it was, the licensing IMHO would make it questionable to use for The LPLC or at least a little murky. WE
would be OK, but integrators and machine builders using our stuff for commercial purposes would be in murkyland. This is even more undesirable than outright proprietary stuff because business types
avoid undefinable risks like the plague. One of our biggest problems will be keeping our legal considerations simple and clear enough to avoid that phenomena. And while I can surely see the reason for software patents, the hidden landmines they create for developers totally overwhelms the good they do for society as a whole. They
should be abolished as unworkable. It's simply impossible to write code and know that you aren't violating someone's patent. Soon, only patent lawyers will do development. I simply can't see how the value of a patent to a single company can outweigh the damage to the public as a whole.



LinuxPLC mailing list
[email protected]