🚀 go-pugleaf

One other possibility is to negotiate a variation of a licensing agreement
that allows for "free" software under certain constraints.  I don't know if
they are even interested in such a thing, but it would be nice to know if
that is the case.

Use of a public key (or other) cryptosystem by the public is not threatened
by the holders of the RSA patent(s).  But such threats do exist, and it would
be in the interests of all of us to be together ready to challenge any such
threats.  If an agreement with respect to free software can be arranged, then
we would certainly be in a better position to challenge such threats.

The case that can be made to reach such an agreement is that some people
simply won't use anything by freely available software with source, whereas
others (usually businesses) prefer vendor supported systems and have little
or no need for source (except to verify correctness).  If an agreement can
be reach with some simple terms, such as supplying copies of all versions
to the patent holder, with a fixed fee for handling their paperwork to deal
with you program, then I think that would be very livable.
-- 
 /***************************************************************************\
/ Phil Howard -- KA9WGN -- phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu   |  Guns don't aim guns at  \
\ Lietuva laisva -- Brivu Latviju -- Eesti vabaks  |  people; CRIMINALS do!!  /
 \***************************************************************************/