From: | Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [pgsql-www] Software Patents |
Date: | 2005-04-22 14:41:06 |
Message-ID: | 758d5e7f0504220741491f1bad@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-www |
On 4/22/05, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> One thing to note ... with ppl like Fujitsu and Greenplum doing
> "extensions" to PostgreSQL and re-releasing it, how many of those
> extensions are patent'd? In Greenplum's case, I believe that they do
> intend on having some patent'd stuff added to their code base, but it
> won't carry over to ours ...
>
> Our goal should be (I think) to be "patent free" when we know about
> patents, just like we did with IBM/ARC ... if we started to become
I think "patent free" is a right way to go! I think everybody should
agree PostgreSQL should be patent free. :) And we had test case,
the ARC patent stuff.
Patent free doesn't imply we are actively against patents, we just
don't want patents to hinder PostgreSQL's development.
Regards,
Dawid
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Hallgren | 2005-04-22 15:09:37 | Re: [pgsql-www] Software Patents |
Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2005-04-22 14:09:03 | Re: [pgsql-www] Software Patents |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Hallgren | 2005-04-22 15:09:37 | Re: [pgsql-www] Software Patents |
Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2005-04-22 14:09:03 | Re: [pgsql-www] Software Patents |