I don't like saying it but this

I don't like saying it but this guy is clearly deluded. He doesn't understand that the GPL perpetuates freedom. It doesn't force anyone to do anything. You don't have to use GPL'd code. You don't have to distribute GPL'd code. But if you do you have to give people the 4 freedoms.

Using the GPL is like saying use my creation to do whatever you want. But if you are going to redistribute my code then you have to give everyone else the freedoms I gave you.

If you say use my creation anyway you like including to lock people in and restrict their freedom, that doesn't aid software freedom like the GPL does.

And yet more FUD from people clearly

And yet more FUD from people clearly unable to read the GPL properly. it is clear from his use of typical FUD words like 'communistic', 'forces', etc. etc.
If anything, the GPL is ant-communistic, because it advances individual freedom. and it is RMS's political agenda that bright us to where we are today. if it weren't for him, there was no FOSS at all.
the gpl3 is a clear continuation of the spirit of v2. if you don't like it, then use another license. i'll keep using gpl, and so do 70% of developers.

"I defy any lawyer to prove me

"I defy any lawyer to prove me the liability of the end-user in this kind of matters."

When you want to comment on patent issues you should make yourself comfortable with the basics of the patent law first.

Here we go:
"Nature of Patent and Patent Rights

The patent is issued in the name of the United States under the seal of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and is either signed by the Director of the USPTO or is electronically written thereon and attested by an Office official. The patent contains a grant to the patentee, and a printed copy of the specification and drawing is annexed to the patent and forms a part of it. The grant confers “the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling the invention throughout the United States or importing the invention into the United States” and its territories and possessions for which the term of the patent shall be generally 20 years from the date on which the application for the patent was filed in the United States or, if the application contains a specific reference to an earlier filed application under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121 or 365(c), from the date of the earliest such application was filed, and subject to the payment of maintenance fees as provided by law. ..."

and furthermore

"Infringement of Patents

Infringement of a patent consists of the unauthorized making, using, offering for sale, or selling any patented invention within the United States or U.S. Territories, or importing into the United States of any patented invention during the term of the patent. If a patent is infringed, the patentee may sue for relief in the appropriate federal court. The patentee may ask the court for an injunction to prevent the continuation of the infringement and may also ask the court for an award of damages because of the infringement. ..."

This and more can be found on the site of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/index.html

So, no lawyer was necessary to prove to you that patent threats (if based on valid patents) do hold water and can't be simply ignored. law is not always common sense, and neither is it always as righteous as it should be.

GPLv3 is not suicide, it is the next step needed to save ourselves from monopolistic software businesses.

you moderate my comment on your

you moderate my comment on your site, i bury yours on this.

-1 vote for you

I didn't realize he is the writer

I didn't realize he is the writer from the blog. He get a bury for spreading BS lies about patent law.

Wikipedia clearly state that patents in most countries are state granted monopoly right to "to prevent or exclude others from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing the invention."

USING and others are the keyword here. So that include the users here. They don't specifically saying anything about manufacturer only.

I also failed to see the difference between inventions and products. Perhaps you would enlight us with your own definitions.

However I am not a lawyer here, so consult a patent lawyer or something.

As far as I know, patents lawsuit are civil case only. You can't go to jail for that.

The only reasons customers still use Chinese products is that companies are afraid to sue their own customers to oblivion, which might become a really nasty backlash.

And oh, patent laws are evil. They equal what I called corporate welfares and rent-seeker friendly.

Rent seekers are those who seek to manipulate economic environment for their own financial gain instead of being a fair but maybe ruthless competitor. In other words, associate it with evil monopolistic companies and organizations like the RIAA.

He doesn't seem to understand the

He doesn't seem to understand the concept of "user subjugation" - the concept of depriving the user any of the rights of free software. He seems to want the power to subjugate other users to himself.

Starchild: thank you for your introduction

Starchild: thank you for your introduction to anarchy.