incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From robert_w...@us.ibm.com
Subject Re: Legal concern: Are we getting to close ot a "division of markets" conversation?
Date Mon, 06 Jun 2011 01:56:17 GMT
Simon Phipps <simon@webmink.com> wrote on 06/05/2011 09:42:14 PM:

> From: Simon Phipps <simon@webmink.com>
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Date: 06/05/2011 09:43 PM
> Subject: Re: Legal concern: Are we getting to close ot a "division 
> of markets" conversation?
> 
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:29 AM, <robert_weir@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > > >
> > > > But I am very very very concerned that this conversation is 
starting
> > to
> > > > cross over into a "division of market" conversation, which has 
stiff
> > > > penalties under US and international competition law.  Open source
> > work,
> > > > like standards, is work done voluntarily among competitors in the
> > market.
> > > > There are some things we must not talk about, especially things 
where
> > > > competitors may be seen as arranging to reduce competition.  We 
need
> > to
> > > > steer the conversation far from this.
> > > >
> > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividing_territories
> > > >
> > > >
> > > We are discussing how the OpenOffice.org community (which as has 
been
> > > explained has two different open source projects in addition to a
> > variety of
> > > downstream commercial consumers of the open source code) could 
structure
> > its
> > > operations.
> > >
> >
> > Simon, in several posts I heard you suggest what sounded to me like a
> > compromise that would reserve end user supported versions for TDF/LO,
> > while Apache would exclude itself from that market and pursue other
> > options.  You put that into the wiki at one point, using the workd
> > "complementary" to describe the division. You've suggested that Apache 
not
> > try to get involved in end-user software, especially where it would
> > compete with TDF/LO.   If I misunderstood you, I apologize.  But if 
you
> > are suggesting anything like that, I think that is crossing the line.
> >
> >
> "Exclude itself from the market" is extraordinary language to use Rob. 
You
> seem to view LibreOffice as a "competitor", as if this were competition
> between IBM and Novell or something. It is not - it is the 
OpenOffice.Org
> community in exile, a stakeholder in the future of the project, a 
resource
> within the community.
> 
> The "art of the possible" here is about exploring ways to make things 
work
> for the open source community, nothing to do with competitors in 
markets.
> This is not a standards community, nor is it a 501(c)6 like Eclipse.
> 
> By the way, I don't work for Sun any more.
> 
> S.

Simon, you wrote recently in an article called "Open Source Critical To 
Competition Say Regulators", about the FTC/DOJ patent review of the Novell 
acquisition:

"open source is a crucial market force, ensuring strong competition, and 
as such deserves regulatory recognition and protection"

http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2011/04/open-source-critical-to-competition/index.htm

That cuts both ways.  Open source is part of the competition.   Briefs in 
that case as well as the decision support that view.  There are limits to 
what competitors can do to divide markets among themselves.  IANL, of 
course, but this smells very bad, and I suggest we don't broach the topic 
again, unless cleared by ASF Legal Affairs.  I myself will withdraw from 
this list if the topic comes up again, pending review by IBM Legal.

-Rob


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message