> >I haven't read the entire thread so this might have been mentioned, but I > >read in The Register not long ago that an American senator (SC or SD) has > >been trying to pass a bill to make it illegal to distribute unlicensed > >software. His campaign was largely funded by Aol Time Warner. Apparently > >it is unlikely the bill will pass, except for benign portions of it, but its > >frightening to consider who would now gain control the server side if it > >did. > > I smell a misinterpretation here. In the first place, there's no > unlicensed software involved here. In the second place, this sounds > like it may have been yet another attempt to curb piracy (or attach > more penalties to it). But do send a link if you find some hard info.
This should put things into perspective, http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/21830.html There's more to it than 'liscensing' and less 'Aol trying to cripple open source', but it's interesting nonetheless. Of course, considering the war on terrorism and security paranoia, it is unsettling to this of what may happen to open source. Cameron _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
