NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

[Jeff V. Merkey]

Alan,

I would like for you to take over NWFS if you are willing.  I have dissolved
TRG as a Utah Corporation and I am now focused on a variety of projects 
for various clients related to Linux development.  Novell has recently 
threatened to try to take my house and assets if I post any more 
NWFS releases or MANOS.  

I am doing very well with my consulting projects, but to be honest, 
my family has sufferred horribly in the past four years fighting with
Novell every other week, and there's a very strong chance I will be 
moving shop to either New Mexico or Arizona, since they own the 
local courts here in Utah (all the judges are mormons in Utah Valley 
and pro-Novell).  

There are several areas that need restructuring and work, and I am 
available to answer questions, and assist with technical consulting,
but I can no longer post releases of NWFS on Linux.  My children 
need a house over their heads, and I believe what Novell says about 
taking it and putting us out on the street.  They are wounded in the 
market, and very dangerous at present, so I am trying very hard to 
stay out of their way.  If you choose to decline, it's up for grabs
with whomever else wants to take it over, but you have first dibs.  

If you elect take it over, I will have my attorneys prepare an 
agreement transferring legal ownership to you.  I will retain M2FS
and the clustered versions, since I have a clients abroad who want this 
technology, and it does not utilitze any NetWare specific technologies.
I would also retain IP rights to NWFS to use future incarnations in 
products should I set up in another state. 

I do not want to see NWFS fall by the wayside and not get supported,
so I would really like it if you would be willing to take it over 
and get it 2.4 clean.  

Please advise,

Jeff

Re: NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

[Jeff V. Merkey]

On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 05:35:58PM -0700, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:

Alan,

There is a very current version which I have not released that is 
in great shape.  I have not posted it.  This is the version I 
would be sending you.

Jeff


> 
> 
> Alan,
> 
> I would like for you to take over NWFS if you are willing.  I have dissolved
> TRG as a Utah Corporation and I am now focused on a variety of projects 
> for various clients related to Linux development.  Novell has recently 
> threatened to try to take my house and assets if I post any more 
> NWFS releases or MANOS.  
> 
> I am doing very well with my consulting projects, but to be honest, 
> my family has sufferred horribly in the past four years fighting with
> Novell every other week, and there's a very strong chance I will be 
> moving shop to either New Mexico or Arizona, since they own the 
> local courts here in Utah (all the judges are mormons in Utah Valley 
> and pro-Novell).  
> 
> There are several areas that need restructuring and work, and I am 
> available to answer questions, and assist with technical consulting,
> but I can no longer post releases of NWFS on Linux.  My children 
> need a house over their heads, and I believe what Novell says about 
> taking it and putting us out on the street.  They are wounded in the 
> market, and very dangerous at present, so I am trying very hard to 
> stay out of their way.  If you choose to decline, it's up for grabs
> with whomever else wants to take it over, but you have first dibs.  
> 
> If you elect take it over, I will have my attorneys prepare an 
> agreement transferring legal ownership to you.  I will retain M2FS
> and the clustered versions, since I have a clients abroad who want this 
> technology, and it does not utilitze any NetWare specific technologies.
> I would also retain IP rights to NWFS to use future incarnations in 
> products should I set up in another state. 
> 
> I do not want to see NWFS fall by the wayside and not get supported,
> so I would really like it if you would be willing to take it over 
> and get it 2.4 clean.  
> 
> Please advise,
> 
> Jeff
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

[Paul Fulghum]

From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@vger.timpanogas.org>

> Novell has recently threatened to try to take my house and
> assets if I post any more NWFS releases or MANOS.
[snip]
> They are wounded in the market ...

A quote for the lumbering lizards at Novell
as they stumble torwards the tarpits:

These moments will be lost in time
like tears in the rain...
time to die.

--
Paul Fulghum
paulkf@microgate.com

Re: NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

[Trever L. Adams]

> I am doing very well with my consulting projects, but to be honest, 
> my family has sufferred horribly in the past four years fighting with
> Novell every other week, and there's a very strong chance I will be 
> moving shop to either New Mexico or Arizona, since they own the 
> local courts here in Utah (all the judges are mormons in Utah Valley 
> and pro-Novell).  

Once again, we have Mr. Merkey at it.  None of his problems can just be 
his, or caused by Novell.  They can't just be because, at one time (no 
longer though), Novell was THE economy for Utah Valley (Provo/Orem 
area).  They can't be because he has little respect for aspects of 
intellectual property (for those who believe in it or are under legal 
systems that do).  The mormons cause them all.

Get real, move on, and get a life Mr. Merkey.

For the record, I believe you are in the wrong here.  I believe that 
there are several non-mormon judges in the area (at least there were a 
little over a year ago when I lived there).

Yes, I am wayyyy off topic.  But lets keep it to the technology and the 
law.  If the finger has to be pointed, point it where it belongs and 
leave the predominant (60% tops) religion out of the picture.

Now back to your regularly schedule flame wars on different technology, 
real discusion, and the real world.

Trever Adams

P.S. Sure, I am LDS (mormon).  I have a problem with the above because 
our religion requires us to stand for truth and I believe Mr. Merkey 
tends to misrepresent the religion.  I would have a problem with him 
misrepresenting any religion (if I knew he was doing so... with many 
religions I would likely not - still... it would be a problem).

P.P.S. Any flames or responses to this that want a response will reply 
in private.  I will not continue this on the list.

Re: NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

[Jeff V. Merkey]

On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 12:16:34AM -0400, Trever L. Adams wrote:
> > I am doing very well with my consulting projects, but to be honest, 
> > my family has sufferred horribly in the past four years fighting with
> > Novell every other week, and there's a very strong chance I will be 
> > moving shop to either New Mexico or Arizona, since they own the 
> > local courts here in Utah (all the judges are mormons in Utah Valley 
> > and pro-Novell).  
> 
> Once again, we have Mr. Merkey at it.  None of his problems can just be 
> his, or caused by Novell.  They can't just be because, at one time (no 
> longer though), Novell was THE economy for Utah Valley (Provo/Orem 
> area).  They can't be because he has little respect for aspects of 
> intellectual property (for those who believe in it or are under legal 
> systems that do).  The mormons cause them all.
> 
> Get real, move on, and get a life Mr. Merkey.
> 
> For the record, I believe you are in the wrong here.  I believe that 
> there are several non-mormon judges in the area (at least there were a 
> little over a year ago when I lived there).
> 
> Yes, I am wayyyy off topic.  But lets keep it to the technology and the 
> law.  If the finger has to be pointed, point it where it belongs and 
> leave the predominant (60% tops) religion out of the picture.
> 
> Now back to your regularly schedule flame wars on different technology, 
> real discusion, and the real world.
> 
> Trever Adams
> 
> P.S. Sure, I am LDS (mormon).  I have a problem with the above because 
> our religion requires us to stand for truth and I believe Mr. Merkey 
> tends to misrepresent the religion.  I would have a problem with him 
> misrepresenting any religion (if I knew he was doing so... with many 
> religions I would likely not - still... it would be a problem).
> 
> P.P.S. Any flames or responses to this that want a response will reply 
> in private.  I will not continue this on the list.

Trevor,

I really think you guys should start using peyote in your temple rituals, 
you'd have a much better grasp on reality.  Most people do not believe
they are going to be gods when they die, which is what mormonisn 
teaches.  I guess a lot of mormoms think they already are, and act like 
it.

:-)

Jeff 

Re: NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

[Jeff V. Merkey]

On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 10:59:59PM -0500, Paul Fulghum wrote:
> 
> From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@vger.timpanogas.org>
> 
> > Novell has recently threatened to try to take my house and
> > assets if I post any more NWFS releases or MANOS.
> [snip]
> > They are wounded in the market ...
> 
> A quote for the lumbering lizards at Novell
> as they stumble torwards the tarpits:
> 
> These moments will be lost in time
> like tears in the rain...
> time to die.

I am watching the walls cave in on Provo and the view is great from 
Where I am sitting.  

:-)

Jeff

> 
> --
> Paul Fulghum
> paulkf@microgate.com
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

[Alan Cox]

> There are several areas that need restructuring and work, and I am 
> available to answer questions, and assist with technical consulting,

I'm not a file sustem hacker, nor since I work for one vendor the 
appropriate owner for larg chunks of code in some people's eyes. I suspect
the FSF is a much much better asignee for the code itself

Alan

Re: NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

[Chris Wedgwood]

On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 01:50:00PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:

> I'm not a file sustem hacker, nor since I work for one vendor the
> appropriate owner for larg chunks of code in some people's eyes. I
> suspect the FSF is a much much better asignee for the code itself

I assume the legal threats that Jeff has experience will follow the
code? Surely before anyone wishes to adopt such a thing they should
get legal advice about the situation?

I would also expect if the FSF are not the assignee (the suggest that
they be is a very good one), then whomever does adopt it might want to
make sure they have some kind of legal representation available should
they need it.

It would be shame to let potentially useful code be left to die for
fear of bully-tactics if their claims are unfounded.


  --cw

Re: NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

[Justin Guyett]

On Mon, 2 Jul 2001, Chris Wedgwood wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 01:50:00PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > I'm not a file sustem hacker, nor since I work for one vendor the
> > appropriate owner for larg chunks of code in some people's eyes. I
> > suspect the FSF is a much much better asignee for the code itself
>
> I assume the legal threats that Jeff has experience will follow the
> code? Surely before anyone wishes to adopt such a thing they should
> get legal advice about the situation?
>
> It would be shame to let potentially useful code be left to die for
> fear of bully-tactics if their claims are unfounded.

presuming they are unfounded, given the history of attacks by Novell,
perhaps the best move would be to turn it over to a company like compaq or
ibm given a written contract that they will keep it open source.  Novell
can't be that stupid.


justin

Re: NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

[Jeff V. Merkey]

On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 01:50:00PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > There are several areas that need restructuring and work, and I am 
> > available to answer questions, and assist with technical consulting,
> 
> I'm not a file sustem hacker, nor since I work for one vendor the 
> appropriate owner for larg chunks of code in some people's eyes. I suspect
> the FSF is a much much better asignee for the code itself
> 
> Alan

I will get with you offline and discuss this possibility.

Jeff

Re: NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

[Jeff V. Merkey]

On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 02:54:18AM +1200, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 01:50:00PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> 
> > I'm not a file sustem hacker, nor since I work for one vendor the
> > appropriate owner for larg chunks of code in some people's eyes. I
> > suspect the FSF is a much much better asignee for the code itself
> 
> I assume the legal threats that Jeff has experience will follow the
> code? Surely before anyone wishes to adopt such a thing they should
> get legal advice about the situation?
> 
> I would also expect if the FSF are not the assignee (the suggest that
> they be is a very good one), then whomever does adopt it might want to
> make sure they have some kind of legal representation available should
> they need it.
> 
> It would be shame to let potentially useful code be left to die for
> fear of bully-tactics if their claims are unfounded.
> 

Their power only extends to the borders of this state.  They have little 
ability to interfere wth someone in Swansea, Great Britian, or even 
Silicon Valley, California.   The problem I have is they can get the 
local courts here to do whatever they ask.  Not so other places.  I think
it's pretty safe so long as I am not the one releasing it.  

Jeff


> 
>   --cw

Re: NWFS Submitted to Alan Cox

[Jeff V. Merkey]

On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 12:23:17PM -0700, Justin Guyett wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Jul 2001, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 01:50:00PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not a file sustem hacker, nor since I work for one vendor the
> > > appropriate owner for larg chunks of code in some people's eyes. I
> > > suspect the FSF is a much much better asignee for the code itself
> >
> > I assume the legal threats that Jeff has experience will follow the
> > code? Surely before anyone wishes to adopt such a thing they should
> > get legal advice about the situation?
> >
> > It would be shame to let potentially useful code be left to die for
> > fear of bully-tactics if their claims are unfounded.
> 
> presuming they are unfounded, given the history of attacks by Novell,
> perhaps the best move would be to turn it over to a company like compaq or
> ibm given a written contract that they will keep it open source.  



> Novell can't be that stupid.

Don't count on it.  I had completed a fully 64-bit OS in 1997 for IA64, 
four years before everyone else.  It's been sitting in an archive 
somewhere inside of Novell -- unused for no other reason than I 
wrote it.  I am waiting to see who would want it.  It's open to 
any takers.  Alan may be in a conflict of interest with Red Hat 
since Novell is an investor in them, so this I understand.  I'll 
wait and see who's interested.  I would not be surprised if 
someone from Novell asks to take it over.   

Jeff


> 
> 
> justin