<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/strict.dtd">
<html><head><meta name="qrichtext" content="1" /><style type="text/css">
p, li { white-space: pre-wrap; }
</style></head><body style=" font-family:'Ubuntu'; font-size:9pt; font-weight:400; font-style:normal;">
<p style=" margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;">On Tuesday, May 15, 2012 10:13:55 AM Steve Hay wrote:<br /></p>
<p style=" margin-top:12px; margin-bottom:12px; margin-left:40px; margin-right:40px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;">What Jeff is saying about additional patent protection I agree with. A key factor in this decision is the additional protection and services provided by SFC, and whether KDE opts to enjoy this benefit. However, I think there is another angle worth considering. The SFC provides active support to the OSS community in the US, and the legal center appears to provide services to everyone. It is difficult to imagine any legal or position the SFC would take that KDE would not be aligned with, and regardless of the direct benefits to KDE, supporting and joining SFC is a powerful statement about KDE's commitment to the FOSS movement in the US.</p>
<p style=" margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"><br /><br />I really don't see any downside to any of this, and I see lots of (unlimited) upside. I understand doing the due diligence steps as any decision is a big one. However if we can assume that everything Jeff and Steve are saying with regard to their well-articulated and thoughtful considerations on the matter is correct, I would hope that this could be brought up to the board and decided on sooner rather than later.</p>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; "> </p>
<p style=" margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;">In my mind knowing that the patent protection provided by the SFC is there if needed, whether or not there are any specific use cases for it right now, is also a plus.</p>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; "> </p>
<p style=" margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;">Another intangible positive in all of this is the exposure it would bring to KDE in seeing how the SFC potentially benefits other OSS Communities in ways that perhaps are unknown to us at present. Specifically, the exposure to seeing what has worked or not for other members in the past, Best Practices, etc, etc. </p>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; "> </p>
<p style=" margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;">Just my potentially naive and over-excited 2 cents...</p>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; "> </p>
<p style=" margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;">- James </p></body></html>