[OSGeo-Standards] [OSGeo-Discuss] Lidar News magazine false statements on (L)GPL (Was REPORT: my OGC membership slot)
martin.isenburg at gmail.com
Fri Nov 27 00:33:22 PST 2015
We must be on the same clock. Just yesterday I inquired via LinkedIn with
the managing editor, Roland Mangold (cc-ed).
"Hello Roland, has the rebuttal to the "Open Source Mania" article been
published in the meantime? Was hoping to see you at ELMF / Capturing
Reality ... Regards, Martin"
the response was
"Hi Martin ...its being reviewed by Marc and Allen Cheves ...they are the
owners of LiDAR Magazine ..."
This could be bad news as usually these kind of publications are always
looking for interesting content ... so letting a few magazines go by for
this well edited article by Oliver seems odd.
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 7:39 AM, Landon Blake <sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com>
> Did we ever hear back from the guys at LIDAR Magazine about publishing a
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:52 AM, Jo Cook <jocook at astuntechnology.com>
>> I think this is something that we at OSGeo should definitely respond to.
>> Perhaps we could contact the magazine and explain that there were some
>> factual errors in the article, and ask for a chance to respond?
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Johan Van de Wauw <
>> johan.vandewauw at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Martin Isenburg
>>> <martin.isenburg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Another curious thing is that I (and the open source license LGPL) was
>>> > attacked vehemently in a recent column called "Open Source Mania" by
>>> > Graham that was published in the LiDAR News magazine. Viewer discretion
>>> > advised and parental guidance suggested ... you will not like this FUD
>>> > attack:
>>> I read the article and there are a lot of statements there which are
>>> " if you touch a piece of GPL code with the nine foot pole of
>>> launching it with a Python script, that script must now be GPLed"
>>> not true
>>> "Suppose you have developed some very, very clever algorithm on which
>>> you and your university have applied for a patent. If you have coded
>>> your algorithm and used any GPL whatsoever, you just GPLed your
>>> patent. The patent rights effectively transfer to the Open Software
>>> Foundation for free distribution."
>>> Completely untrue. The Open Software Foundation does not exist. You
>>> don't transfer patent rights at all. A well known counter-example is
>>> the algortihm for MP3, where the code (lame) was released under LGPL.
>>> I think as OSGeo we should reply to the statements, this is an attack
>>> on our community. Perhaps we can ask someone from the Free Software
>>> Foundation Europe to help write a response?
>>> Kind Regards,
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> *Jo Cook*
>> Astun Technology Ltd, The Coach House, 17 West Street, Epsom, Surrey,
>> KT18 7RL, UK
>> t:+44 7930 524 155
>> iShare - Data integration and publishing platform
>> Company registration no. 5410695. Registered in England and Wales.
>> Registered office: 120 Manor Green Road, Epsom, Surrey, KT19 8LN VAT no.
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Standards