Is mono a problem outside the US and other patent friendly countries?
Here in Europe we do not care about software patents, at least not yet.
As Canonical is based in the EU this should not give the Ubuntu community any issue by itself. So keep any patent related problem for United-States based distributions and leave Ubuntu alone. Or move to a country that enforces your freedom all-day-every-day!
While working with Egil (aka redhog aka representing-the-Pirate-party-in-Norway-colleague) in the iFolder packaging for Ubuntu I have seen the DRMish “safety computing” signing issue with dynamic linking to be a bigger problem than any patent issue that mono may represent, at least in our jurisdiction (Norway).
This is because if I link a proprietary applications to a library I should be able to change or replace that underlying library without modifying the application itself. At least if you think LGPL compliance. Thus there is a design failure that makes this mono thing a lot more complicated than I thought in order to comply to the LGPL with mono apps that are not free, since you would have to change the signing in the propietary application in order to link it to a new library, which is by no way trivial in a proprietary app. Is then mono/.net even an option?
I think I am right about this, but please can somebody shed light on this from a technical/juridical point of view? I might be wrong, you know… As I’ve been before.
Anyway I hope to be able to tell you that iFolder 3.7 is ready to be sponsored into Ubuntu within the Karmic release cycle (and of course added to debian as well), and that this bug can be closed. So we all can finally just drop that box!
Untill then, have a nice weekend! 🙂