Re: [gNewSense-users] FTL patent in kernel

[Bake Timmons]

>> The nasty effect of
>> the patent note applies as well to any other file as it does to ftl.c.
>> E.g., if I modified Emacs to use FTL format for non-PCMCIA
>> applications, my code could possibly be infringing and thus possibly
>> be non-free.  Am I missing anything here?
>
> I think so.  This is tricky.  The key is *substantial* restrictions to
> the freedom.  If we were to take a "no restrictions whatsoever"
> approach, then nothing could ever be Free Software, because you'd
> always find something someone might want to do that would be forbidden
> by law somewhere.
>
> If you start from Emacs, there's a whole lot you can change it without
> ever stepping on the landmine that a software patent amounts to.  But
> if you start from a piece of software that implements a patent under a
> very restrictive license, there might be very little you could change
> without stepping on the landmine.

I think you are suggesting that I could, say, write a FTL mode in
Emacs and use it for many non-PCMCIA uses and widely distribute this
code, and that this would not be as risky as assuming that ftl.c is
free enough to be distributed by gNewSense.  As you suggested before,
I will request the opinion of the FSF on this issue.