| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
"Positive One-upsmanship""Positive One-upsmanship"Posted Jan 11, 2005 16:41 UTC (Tue) by Duncan (guest, #6647)Parent article: IBM frees 500 patents
Look for Novell to respond to this. It has
(Log in to post comments)
Novell is behind at this point Posted Jan 11, 2005 17:48 UTC (Tue) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] Red Hat and IBM have both contributed patents to the free software community (though Red Hat requires that a copyleft license be used). Novell's promises with respect to patents have been far more limited at this stage. Novell has only promised to refrain from using its patents to attack Linux; it has not made an explicit grant of its patents for use by any free software developer who uses an approved license.
Novell is behind at this point Posted Jan 11, 2005 19:48 UTC (Tue) by XERC (guest, #14626) [Link] Isn't there a case that, if Novell distributesany GPL-d code that its patents cover, then according to the GPL, Novell has given a grant to these patents to anyone who develops GPL-d code? The same wiht Red-Hat, IBM, SCO, etc.? Please correct me here. It's not my idea, it's a thought, that I remember from the once apon a time SCO related thread on LWN.
Novell is behind at this point Posted Jan 11, 2005 20:18 UTC (Tue) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link] No, that part means it only covers GPLed software. However JoeBuck failed tomention that Novell also promised to use their patents to protect open source projects from outside patent claims.
Novell is behind at this point Posted Jan 11, 2005 21:34 UTC (Tue) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] As I read Novell's patent policy, they've only pledged to defend open source software that they have developed (e.g. Ximian Evolution), or that they market, sell, or support.Just the same, the actions of Novell, IBM, and Red Hat are helpful, and are likely to dissuade large software companies from attacking Linux or GNU (because they are vulnerable to a counterattack). The biggest vulnerability may come from a lawyers-only company that somehow owns an important patent (fortunately, SCO doesn't have any significant patents).
Novell is behind at this point Posted Jan 12, 2005 8:06 UTC (Wed) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link] "Isn't there a case that, if Novell distributes any GPL-d code that its patents cover, then according to the GPL, Novell has given a grant to these patents to anyone who develops GPL-d code?"
This is inherent in the GPL. If you release software as GPL (ie you are *both* the copyright owner *and* the patent owner), the patents clause and the redistribution clause in the GPL together effectively turn the GPL into a patent licence. This is *automatic*.
And if you are not the copyright owner, but distribute code that implements your patent, you get caught by pretty much the same logic.
Cheers,
Novell is behind at this point Posted Jan 11, 2005 20:05 UTC (Tue) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] I think you need to get your facts adjusted. You're almost right, though. Go back and look at the Novell's press release. It's *very* much in-your-face to companies who wish to use patents to threaten Free Software. What Novell was saying is that they will use their patents to go after any company that tries to sue any of the Free Software products they sell. Since they pretty much include the same core bits as any other Linux distributor, this effectly defends *all* distributions, albeit indirectly and not in all cases. In the Red Hat case, though what they've done is a nice gesture, they *have* no patents to contribute. Only applied-for patents. Overall, I think this is an awesome move by IBM. I even posted a 'dream with me' comment on Groklaw some time ago imagining a time when IBM uses it's massive patent portfolio to whip into submission any company who tries to sue FOSS developers. This is one huge step in that direction. Let's hope it's the begining of the end for software patents as a weapon (or software patents altogether) and a message to our friends over in Europe.
Novell is behind at this point Posted Jan 11, 2005 21:47 UTC (Tue) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] While Novell's portfolio is significant and Red Hat's isn't (yet), Red Hat has at least one patent: #6,754,891 ("debugger system using tracepoints for computer software"). Evidently Red Hat has a number of patents in the pipeline.Novell has promised to defend the free software that they developed or distribute, but they have not made any promise that free software developers will not be sued if they infringe on a Novell patent, other than the implied promise made by the fact that they distribute GPL'ed software. Ideally, Novell will take its cue from IBM and publish a list, naming specific patent numbers and specific conditions under which those patents can be used.
|
|
||||||||||||