Subject: RE: Sender-ID and free software

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 08:22:49 -0700

Richard,

	I would rather resist YOU here and now.

	How DARE you come into this group and make this type of accusation
without the slightest concern or interest in what the group is trying to
achieve? You have made no effort to understand the situation before
launching your attack.

	Microsoft has been told the license terms it must satisfy for the
Sumbitter proposal to be a part of the MARID standard and the time by which
they must provide the necessary assurances. These can only come from the
Microsoft legal department.

	Please go and find yourself another platform for your political
ideology.

		Phill

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Richard Stallman
> Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 3:43 PM
> To: Michel Bouissou; IETF MARID WG
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Sender-ID and free software
> 
> 
> 
> (Michel, I am not a member of this list, so would you please
> forward my message if it does not go through?)
> 
> Microsoft's Sender-ID license is directly incompatible with free
> software regardless of which free software license is used.  Free
> software means users are free to run it, study and modify the source,
> and to redistribute it with or without changes.  Free to do so means
> there is no requirement to ask or tell anyone that you are doing so.
> 
> The Microsoft license for Sender-ID directly forbids release of
> software with all these freedoms, so it is impossible for any program
> to be free software under Microsoft's regime.
> 
> I've been expecting to see something like this ever since Gates
> started talking about spam.  This license is an example of Microsoft's
> strategy for killing off free software as an alternative to Windows.
> Microsoft first patents something, then incorporates it into a format
> or protocol, then tries to make it de rigueur while excluding those it
> wishes to exclude.  In the absence of resistance, Microsoft has a good
> chance of imposing whatever standards it likes.  Let us, therefore,
> resist it here and now.
>

---

From: Michel Bouissou <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 20:12:38 +0200

Le dimanche 25 Juillet 2004 17:22, Hallam-Baker, Phillip a écrit :
> 	How DARE you come into this group [...]
[...]
> 	Please go and find yourself another platform for your political

Welcome to my .autoplonk file, Phillip.

-- 
Michel Bouissou <[email-masked]> OpenPGP ID 0xDDE8AC6E

---

From: Richard Stallman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 21:28:49 -0400

Since I have no power, there's nothing to resist.  All I can do is
present arguments and hope they will persuade people.  If you don't
find them persuasive, they cannot do anything to you.  A mere shrug is
sufficient to resist them.

By contrast, Microsoft, with its software patents, has real power, and
is a real danger.  You can't remain safe from Microsoft by ignoring
it: it can sue you for that.  If a standards committee ignores that
danger, it could mean big trouble for the whole Internet for a decade
or more.

    achieve?

The danger that an important standard feature may be off limits to the
whole free software world is what I'm concerned about.  My
understanding is that this group can make decisions that either allow
that to happen or prevent it from happening.  Even the potential for
such a threat calls for an alarm, so that a terrible mistake is not
made.

If people have already taken the necessary steps to prevent this
danger, I am glad to hear it; however, other messages suggest that
this is not the case, so it is just as well to make double sure.

	    Microsoft has been told the license terms it must satisfy for the
    Sumbitter proposal to be a part of the MARID standard and the time by which
    they must provide the necessary assurances.

Would the provision of these assurances involve changes in the
Microsoft license such that implementations undr some kind of free
software license would be permitted?  If so, that would solve the
problem.  Thank you very much, if you have insisted on this already.