On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 07:51:31PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: > Also, I am not sure it is useful to distinguish between > "use-restricted" and "patent-restricted", given that the consequences > would be the same.
the reason i suggested having a "patent-restriced" category is that patents don't necessarily prevent individuals from using the patented technology in their own home, they only prevent the commercial exploitation of that patented technology. e.g. if i hear of a cool idea for a new and/or improved gadget, i can build one myself and use it whenever i like. i can even tell my friends how to do the same. what i can't do, however, is sell it without licensing the technology from the patent holder. what is the difference between sharing the plans for a gadget, and sharing the source code for a program? in other words, it's debatable whether a software patent entitles a company to sue an individual for compiling and using free source code that implements their patented algorithms. craig -- craig sanders
