what *is* the approval process?

[Alexander Terekhov]

On 9/4/07, Donovan Hawkins <hawkins at cephira.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Sep 2007, Rick Moen wrote:
>
> > Quoting Chris DiBona (cdibona at gmail.com):
> >
> >> Wow. I mean, seriously, wow.
> >
> > Chris, you're aware that that's Daniel "GPL violates the Sherman Act"
> > Wallace, right?
> > http://lwn.net/Articles/177293/
>
> See, this is why killfiles are not sufficient. It takes too long for
> new guys like myself to learn who all the nuts are, by which point we've
> replied to them several times thinking we were engaging in useful dialog.
>
> I mean, you could at least keep out the ones who are actively attempting
> to DESTROY open-source software...unless they are [Microsoft]

Microsoft aside, it appears that you're fundamentally mistaken
regarding Wallace case and "destruction" of open source.  If the GPL
is to be found to be in violation of the Sherman Act (price-fixing and
all that) then the GPL and the copyrights underlying it are simply to
become unenforceable (same as with a bit less egregious copyright
misuse not raised to level of anitrust violation). Entering (quasi)
public domain is hardly "destruction" of open-source. I'd rather call
it liberation of code and great contribution to the pool of truly free
software fully conform to the OSD (hint: "must not place restrictions
on other software").

First, the leading case on the subject -- Lasercomb v. Reynolds:
http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/cases/15PQ2D1846.htm

Then, a discussion of copyright misuse from Hollaar's treatise:
http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise15.html#secII.K.

Hth.

regards,
alexander.