| From: | Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ARC patent |
| Date: | 2005-01-17 21:06:04 |
| Message-ID: | 1105995964.2886.502.camel@jeff |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> You want scarey --- forget the IBM patent. Find an Oracle or Microsoft
> patent that is similar to something in our code. It will might not be
> exact, but our ARC isn't exact either.
>
> Basically any organization that wants to produce patent-free code would
> need one lawyer for every five programmers, and even then it isn't 100%.
> The method I have heard to find infringement sounds pretty imprecise.
>
> The remedy for patent infringment I think is usually to stop using the
> patented idea, rather than punitive damages, unlike copyright.
>
Is that for all kinds of patent infringement, or only the
didn't-know-better kind? Right now I don't think we can claim
"didn't-know-better".
Also, does "stop" mean stop distributing the patented process, or stop
using all installations?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-01-17 21:07:36 | Re: ARC patent |
| Previous Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2005-01-17 21:05:54 | Re: ARC patent |