Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> The argument proposed was attempting to say "No company is ever going >> to grant free patent licenses"; I pointed out the argument applies >> equally to software > > And I point out that it doesn't. If the company patent their invention > at all, it must be because they intend to restrict people from using > it (or at least keep an option open for using the patent to restrict > what people do). If they do not intend that, why would they apply for > a patent at all in the first place?
In the current patent-litigation context, a large stable of patents to cross-license is considered a vitally important corporate defense strategy. >> (it's the same one that proprietary software advocates have been >> making for about 20 years, claiming that free software can't work), > > No, it has nothing to do with that argument.
