I was somewhat concerned reading Mark's posting earlier today. Obviously, things are very bad in the US at the moment. Their Government even deported Cat Stevens the other day (check http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3686992.stm ). Clearly, given the fact that Digium contributes so much to Asterisk, they shouldn't be forced to risk their company's future by hosting these mailing lists in such an unstable environment where they could get sued for any ridiculous reason. Even an unjustified, ambit claim could generate huge defence costs on Digium's part, and cripple their ability to contribute to Asterisk. Therefore, it seems to be in the best interests of Asterisk's `security' to have the mailing lists hosted by someone other than Digium and maybe in a country that doesn't prohibit freedom of expression. I would certainly be willing to organise hosting through another company that wouldn't be at risk from vexatious legal claims. This would allow genuinely open discussion on the lists and would mean that no messages would need to be censored from the archives.
On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Daniel Pocock wrote:> Therefore, it seems to be in the best interests of Asterisk's `security' > to have the mailing lists hosted by someone other than Digium and maybe > in a country that doesn't prohibit freedom of expression.Amusing bit of stirring there. But, PLEASE, lets pass on the transatlantic flamewar!? Steve
Another solution would be to keep the discussions on topic and open up a separate mailing list for people interested in open discussions. Jonathan At 07:17 PM 9/26/2004 +0100, you wrote:>I was somewhat concerned reading Mark's posting earlier today. > >Obviously, things are very bad in the US at the moment. Their Government >even deported Cat Stevens the other day (check >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3686992.stm ). > >Clearly, given the fact that Digium contributes so much to Asterisk, they >shouldn't be forced to risk their company's future by hosting these >mailing lists in such an unstable environment where they could get sued >for any ridiculous reason. Even an unjustified, ambit claim could >generate huge defence costs on Digium's part, and cripple their ability to >contribute to Asterisk. > >Therefore, it seems to be in the best interests of Asterisk's `security' >to have the mailing lists hosted by someone other than Digium and maybe in >a country that doesn't prohibit freedom of expression. > >I would certainly be willing to organise hosting through another company >that wouldn't be at risk from vexatious legal claims. This would allow >genuinely open discussion on the lists and would mean that no messages >would need to be censored from the archives. > > > >_______________________________________________ >Asterisk-Users mailing list >Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users >To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
I agree with the mailing list part, but things arent very bad in the USA. Yusuf Islam was denied entry, not deported. I am sure there is more to this story than is being told or possibly ever will be told. He is not a US citizen and can be denied entry for any reason or suspicion. Please do not spill your feelings about the USA onto this mailing list while trying to mask them behind protecting Digium. Thanks, Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Pocock" <daniel@readytechnology.co.uk> To: <asterisk-dev@lists.digium.com>; <asterisk-users@lists.digium.com> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 2:17 PM Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Digium and mailing lists> > I was somewhat concerned reading Mark's posting earlier today. > > Obviously, things are very bad in the US at the moment. Their > Government even deported Cat Stevens the other day (check > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3686992.stm ). > > Clearly, given the fact that Digium contributes so much to Asterisk, > they shouldn't be forced to risk their company's future by hosting these > mailing lists in such an unstable environment where they could get sued > for any ridiculous reason. Even an unjustified, ambit claim could > generate huge defence costs on Digium's part, and cripple their ability > to contribute to Asterisk. > > Therefore, it seems to be in the best interests of Asterisk's `security' > to have the mailing lists hosted by someone other than Digium and maybe > in a country that doesn't prohibit freedom of expression. > > I would certainly be willing to organise hosting through another company > that wouldn't be at risk from vexatious legal claims. This would allow > genuinely open discussion on the lists and would mean that no messages > would need to be censored from the archives. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users >
Things aren't "bad in the US at the moment." In fact, I think they're pretty good, because people actually seem concerned about PATENT and COPYRIGHT LAWs which your initial post attempted to circumvent. There was no issue with freedom of expression; there was an issue with legality of posts based on content. You're free to express your discontent about G.729 licensing issues, but you're not allowed to advertise a way to *steal* the software. In other terms, you are allowed to loudly and eloquently disagree with the price of goods, but your disapproval does not give you the right to steal it -- or explain to others how to steal and get away with it. FWIW, your little blurp, while obviously politically motivated, contained several inaccuracies: 1) There is no person by the name of Cat Stevens. That former singer changed his name legally to Yusuf Islam decades ago. 2) He was not deported, but rather denied entry. It's the right of any country to turn non-citizens back for any reason, and it happened to several friends of mine attempting to enter the US, Canada and on two occasions, Germany. 3) Yusuf Islam is not a US Citizen and as such has no legal *right* to enter the US as a visitor or for any reason; therefore his proposed legal action will likely not be "legal" in the sense that any law granting Mr. Islam rights, was indeed violated.> -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Pocock [mailto:daniel@readytechnology.co.uk] > Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 1:17 PM > To: asterisk-dev@lists.digium.com; asterisk-users@lists.digium.com > Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Digium and mailing lists > > > > I was somewhat concerned reading Mark's posting earlier today. > > Obviously, things are very bad in the US at the moment. Their > Government even deported Cat Stevens the other day (check > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3686992.stm ). > > Clearly, given the fact that Digium contributes so much to Asterisk, > they shouldn't be forced to risk their company's future by > hosting these > mailing lists in such an unstable environment where they > could get sued > for any ridiculous reason. Even an unjustified, ambit claim could > generate huge defence costs on Digium's part, and cripple > their ability > to contribute to Asterisk. > > Therefore, it seems to be in the best interests of Asterisk's > `security' > to have the mailing lists hosted by someone other than Digium > and maybe > in a country that doesn't prohibit freedom of expression. > > I would certainly be willing to organise hosting through > another company > that wouldn't be at risk from vexatious legal claims. This > would allow > genuinely open discussion on the lists and would mean that no > messages > would need to be censored from the archives.
Steve... I think its Fair to say I am not going to see your for any legal advice.... Me and my Great... Great Grand kids would pay for the rest of our lives trying to recover from your legal advice... -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Nick Bachmann Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 10:31 PM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium and mailing lists steve wrote:>I do not believe that the usage of G729 that is unlicensed is illegal. It >is now been released in the general public domain. The law in the US >states that it is the duty of the trademark or patent owner to take action. >If that owner does not take action then they lose their interest. > >This is not true for patents, only trademarks. A patent holder need not universally enforce a patent to retain interest. [Snip]>By the way, I am an attorney. > >Hopefully not one specializing in IP. Nick _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Gentlemen, can you please move this topic to another forum? While it has been thought provoking, it has moved far beyond the realm of Asterisk and of usefulness to this group. And, quite frankly the "my country is better than yours" argument IMHO has no place on this list. Can we get back to the business of making * a better telphony platform?> -----Original Message----- > From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com > [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of > Steve Underwood > Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 11:52 AM > To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion > Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium and mailing lists > > Kevin Walsh wrote: > > >>>Of course I have the funds. I'd turn up in court on the first day, > >>>state that software and mathematics patents are not legal and the > >>>case would be closed. In fact, the case probably wouldn't be heard > >>>in the first place - the filing clerk would probably laugh > NTT out of > >>>the building. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>If you think that, you clearly have not the slightest clue what is > >>involved. The reason really dumb bogus patents are worth getting is > >>because it costs far more to shoot down even the dumbest > ones than to pay > >>off the holder. > >> > >> > >It's not even worth talking to you about this sort of thing, as your > >view is biased toward the US "justice" system. In England, court > >judgements don't only go to the people who can afford to pay > for them; > >Our system is a little fairer than that. > > > >To be specific in the defence strategy, I'd turn up in court > and point > >out that software and mathematics patents are not legal. The people > >who brought the case would have to justify their action by > showing that > >their patents are legal. When it becomes clear that they > are not, the > >case would be closed. The loser would pay the court costs and all > >reasonable costs incurred by the winner, and we'd all be > home for lunch. > > > >Now, can you please drop it and get a clue. > > > > > As I said before, I'm British. I only know the screweyness of the US > patent system by its reputation. I know a little of how IP > law works in > Britain from actual experience. If you end up in court it is because > someone has a granted patent, and claim you infringe it. If > your defence > is that you don't infringe the patent, you can have a tough and > unpredictable time proving it. If you say the patent office > were a bunch > of idiots for ever granting such a bogus patent in the first > place, how > long winded and costly an effort do you think you might be embroiling > yourself in? You are trying to overturn a decision that is > considered to > have been made after due consideration by the British or EU patent > office. You aren't going to do that easily. This is why many > American's > are so concerned about how easy it has become to get a patent granted > there. Whatever you may think of it, it is a legally granted > document. > It gives you the high ground. > > I know people who have been involved in trying to shoot down bogus > patents in Britain. These were hardware patents. They covered > blatantly > obvious and unoriginal things. The patent holders usually win. If you > don't stand to gain by at least a few million pounds if you win, it > isn't worth starting out down that path. > > Regards, > Steve > > _______________________________________________ > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users >