MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20161002171137.GA18452@fedora-21-dvm>
References: <CAKzdR-rsy1m-H4fYFuCim5+YJi_C2kgjxymM8A7_nEuqsZoO+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20161002161717.GA13915@fedora-21-dvm>
	<CAKzdR-qsj80cuq27YP0hCXtSL734G4QatmopLANpynvQYNRU=A@mail.gmail.com>
	<20161002171137.GA18452@fedora-21-dvm>
From: Andrew Johnson <andrew.johnson83@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2016 12:18:08 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAy62_+cqR0-DBbKhePo+VqTJc099zXJR0EurLyb1XURUCT36g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11478e46e8e999053de502f2
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Drivechain proposal using OP_COUNT_ACKS
Precedence: list

--001a11478e46e8e999053de502f2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

The purpose of this list is highly technical discussion, not political
disagreements.

Is this particular proposal encumbered by a licensing type, patent, or
pending patent which would preclude it from being used in the bitcoin
project?  If not, you're wildly off topic.

On Oct 2, 2016 12:11 PM, "Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 02:00:01PM -0300, Sergio Demian Lerner wrote:
> > Peter, are you really going to try to down vote a decent free and
> > open-source proposal that benefits all the Bitcoin community including
> > you and your future children because a personal attack to me without any
> > logic or basis?
>
> I've suggested a way that you can rectify this situation so we can
> continue to
> collaborate: Have Rootstock adopt a legally binding patent pledge/license.
> I'd
> suggest you do as Blockstream has done and at minimum adopt the Defensive
> Patent License (DPL); I personally will be doing so in the next week or
> two for
> my own consulting company (I'm discussing exactly how to do so with my
> lawyer
> right now).
>
> If Rootstock is not planning on getting any patents for offensive purposes,
> then there is no issue with doing so - the DPL in particular is designed
> in a
> minimally intrusive way.
>
> Please fix this issue so we can in fact continue to collaborate to improve
> Bitcoin.
>
> --
> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>

--001a11478e46e8e999053de502f2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr">The purpose of this list is highly technical discussion, not=
 political disagreements.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">Is this particular proposal encumbered by a licensing type, =
patent, or pending patent which would preclude it from being used in the bi=
tcoin project?=C2=A0 If not, you&#39;re wildly off topic.</p>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Oct 2, 2016 12=
:11 PM, &quot;Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoi=
n-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&=
gt; wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Sun, =
Oct 02, 2016 at 02:00:01PM -0300, Sergio Demian Lerner wrote:<br>
&gt; Peter, are you really going to try to down vote a decent free and<br>
&gt; open-source proposal that benefits all the Bitcoin community including=
<br>
&gt; you and your future children because a personal attack to me without a=
ny<br>
&gt; logic or basis?<br>
<br>
I&#39;ve suggested a way that you can rectify this situation so we can cont=
inue to<br>
collaborate: Have Rootstock adopt a legally binding patent pledge/license. =
I&#39;d<br>
suggest you do as Blockstream has done and at minimum adopt the Defensive<b=
r>
Patent License (DPL); I personally will be doing so in the next week or two=
 for<br>
my own consulting company (I&#39;m discussing exactly how to do so with my =
lawyer<br>
right now).<br>
<br>
If Rootstock is not planning on getting any patents for offensive purposes,=
<br>
then there is no issue with doing so - the DPL in particular is designed in=
 a<br>
minimally intrusive way.<br>
<br>
Please fix this issue so we can in fact continue to collaborate to improve<=
br>
Bitcoin.<br>
<br>
--<br>
<a href=3D"https://petertodd.org" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">http=
s://petertodd.org</a> &#39;peter&#39;[:-1]@<a href=3D"http://petertodd.org"=
 rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">petertodd.org</a><br>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div></div>

--001a11478e46e8e999053de502f2--