[Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 08:26:13AM -0800, Christopher K.  St.  John wrote:
> Thats the only way it makes sense, right?

I think you are missing the mark here: It's about allowing all kinds of
pluginst that are coded under a license different than the gpl without
having to worry about those licenses (and in some countries the patents
that might be involved).
The h.323 plugin is a good example where all conspiracy theories about big
companies are failing - because that's not where the problem is.
If you are worried about "accepting" cisco's claims or not: I don't care
about them and even if they were valid: All that needs to be done to be
compliant again would be to disable the *compilation/running* of the
patented stuff, because documenting patented stuff is not forbidden without
a license, only the *usage* might be.
If we get hold of all the people who posted "relevant" patches, then
we should do it.

 Ciao
     Jörg

--
Joerg Mayer                                          <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
I found out that "pro" means "instead of" (as in proconsul). Now I know
what proactive means.