Re: New MS patent: sounds like PG db rules

Nikola Milutinovic wrote:
> Still, this sounds dangerous. It should be, even legally, WRONG to
> patent something that already exist and was not invented by the
> patentee. I know we can laugh off MS in court, but what about new DBs
> or project even built on PG that have this functionality? Software
> patents are a menace, I'm afraid. And this is still just one portion.
> IBM is also into this line of "work".
>
> Nix.
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
> To: Justin Clift <justin(at)salasaga(dot)org>
> Cc: Jonathan Bond-Caron <jbondc(at)gmail(dot)com>; A. Kretschmer
> <andreas(dot)kretschmer(at)schollglas(dot)com>; pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 3:18:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] New MS patent: sounds like PG db rules
>
> HI Justin
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Justin Clift <justin(at)salasaga(dot)org
> <mailto:justin(at)salasaga(dot)org>> wrote:
>
> > I'm trying to point out that - PG is a database system - and MS may have
> > just been granted a patent for a fundamental part of it.
> >
> > Thinking it might need looking in to, and trying to bring it to the
> > attention of some that can (or even cares?). ;>
>
> I don't think it's a major issue. Even if MS do think we infringe on
> the patent it would be laughable for them to try to do anything about
> it given that our rules implementation has provably existed in a
> leading FOSS project for a decade or more.
>
> --
> Dave Page
> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> <mailto:pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>
Question??? Does the license that Postgresql works under allow for a
foundation or non for profit entity be created that would hold onto
patents for original ideas of the contributors so WE can protect the
users and developers of postgresql

The idea start playing the game MS and other Software companies are
playing where they keep applying for patents/copyrights where there is
prior art. This would protect everyone in the development chain from
having defend stupid lawsuits that these companies could bring against
the biggest offenders.

USPTO only looks at existing patents and trademarks to see if they can
issue a patent . So if a patent makes claims on already existing art
it puts the burden on the original inventor to get the patent revoke.
Doing the above would help put an end to this.

This is just a suggestion.