Weekly Edition
Return to the Announcements page
| |||||||||||||
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS
Network Appliance is suing Sun over patents alleged to cover parts of the ZFS filesystem. The announcement comes from NetApp's founder and Executive VP Dave Hitz's blog. "This case is especially sensitive, because Sun has released ZFS as open source. It is admirable to contribute to open source. I have done it personally, although it was a long time ago that I was writing code, and NetApp has also contributed as a company. But it doesnt help the open source movement to give away code that is encumbered with someone elses patent rights. The sooner we determine the true status of ZFS, the better it will be for everyone. NetApp certainly doesnt believe that we can somehow erase every copy of ZFS that has been downloaded. (Impossible!) This lawsuit isnt about downloads for personal or non-commercial use; it is about what Sun is doing."
(Log in to post comments)
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 5, 2007 21:36 UTC (Wed) by csnook (guest, #36935) [Link] It's worth noting that NetApp didn't start this fight. This is their response to Sun's allegations that NetApp is infringing Sun patents. Comparisons to SCO would be quite unfair.
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 5, 2007 23:06 UTC (Wed) by ajross (subscriber, #4563) [Link] Two wrongs don't make a right though. It just means we have two bad guys to worry about instead of one. Sigh.
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 6, 2007 11:11 UTC (Thu) by i3839 (guest, #31386) [Link] The uglier the patent space becomes, the better, because otherwise the patent rules will never be changed. So let them fight till everone sees how stupid and unproductive the whole thing is.
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 6, 2007 17:39 UTC (Thu) by jschrod (subscriber, #1646) [Link] Good luck with waiting.There are thousands of people dying each year because of the patent nonsense in pharma and genetically manipulated food areas. (You have read about the AIDS problem worldwide, haven't you?) This is a long way from the problems that we have with software patents, and nobody rushes for a change. The argument "it must get worse first" is not practical, IMHO. Our only chance is political activity. Joachim
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 7, 2007 12:25 UTC (Fri) by i3839 (guest, #31386) [Link] The pharma industry is rotten till the bone, and a different case altogether. The difference is that the patent situation is advantageous for them, though bad for everyone else. While in the IT case it's a fight within the industry, and it hurst everyone (except the dodgy "IP" companies), so the chances are much higher that the situation will be fixed when enough companies see what madness they're in.
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 13, 2007 19:54 UTC (Thu) by renox (subscriber, #23785) [Link] >>There are thousands of people dying each year because of the patent nonsense in pharma and genetically manipulated food areas. (You have read about the AIDS problem worldwide, haven't you?) This is a long way from the problems that we have with software patents, and nobody rushes for a change.<<
Nobody rush for a change because that's a thorny issue: suppose you kill patents totally, what happens?
There are already many illness that pharma don't really try to cure, but they affect mostly poor people so the ROI is not good enough..
How can lawmakers solve this dilemna? Answer they can't really, giving some price reduction to poor countries helps (and then have to check that the low cost drugs are not sell on other countries in the black market), but that's really tough to decide which one get the price reduction and by how.
A totally different issue from SW patents which are useless as shown by the fact that Europe doesn't accept SW patents and that nobody is missing them (except lawyers of course).
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 13, 2007 21:23 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] Well, they can do it actually. A tax on pharmaceutical company profits,earmarked to pay for grants for drug research, the grant allocation board containing members from each pharmaceutical company... that would do it. (As far as I know nobody implements this system, so maybe it's unstable in some way I don't see right now.)
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 5, 2007 22:36 UTC (Wed) by foom (subscriber, #14868) [Link] Indeed. It seems to me that Sun was remarkably stupid in attempting to shake down NetApp, whenthey are violating what seems to be a quite valid patent on the core of ZFS.
Sun really ought to tell their lawyers to look before they leap...
I have absolutely no problem with a someone using patents in a defensive way, as seems to be the
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 6, 2007 20:45 UTC (Thu) by lakeland (subscriber, #1157) [Link] That was my guess too.
(hypothesis) Sun was worried about NetApp's patent portfolio so went around making noises such as "gee, you really don't want to be doing that when we have a patent on ...". One option for NetApp then is to cross licence and give Sun exactly what it wants.
Instead NetApp has called Sun's bluff. Well, we'll see how it pans out. Shame about the technological implications, I'm a big fan of ZFS.
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 5, 2007 23:28 UTC (Wed) by movement (guest, #871) [Link] It's worth clarifying that (according to NetApp's version), it was StorageTek pre-Sun-purchase, not Sun - quite a bit different.
Patents Shmatents Posted Sep 5, 2007 21:39 UTC (Wed) by marduk (subscriber, #3831) [Link] The first part of the blog begins a lot like this story, where Sun was on the receiving end of "patent bullying". This, of course, is not new and won't change anything. It just once again points out the need for change, but lacks anything strong enough to bring about any. But just to be on the safe side, perhaps the Linux community should shy away from (re-)implementing ZFS for a while ;-)
Patents Shmatents Posted Sep 6, 2007 18:15 UTC (Thu) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link] "" But just to be on the safe side, perhaps the Linux community should shy away from (re-)implementing ZFS for a while... "" Perhaps a better way to show the strength of OSS is a workaround... no ?
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 5, 2007 22:10 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] That's a rather short-sighted blog entry. Hitz appears to believe thatonly `personal and non-commercial' users could possibly be taking advantage of the freedom of OpenSolaris...
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 5, 2007 22:36 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] Nope. It looks like he believe that `personal and non-commercial' users must be outside of this fight entirely - because they just have no resources to participate in such a fight and even if they'll lose - it'll not bring financial prosperity to winner anyway. Commercial users certainly do have the resources to fight and they can pay if they'll lose - they thus are not to be excluded. If you'll read his blog further you'll find that he thinks software patents are evil and should be reformed - but while the rules are in pace NetApp does not have any other option except participate in fight. Sensible approach IMO...
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 5, 2007 22:36 UTC (Wed) by ncm (subscriber, #165) [Link] This is a little bit comical. NetApp may have been the first to use these techniques in a file system, but they were common currency among those implementing data stores that underlay databases, e.g. Postgres.
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 5, 2007 22:40 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] And that probably means that something like this was implemented in AS/400 for years so the end result will be that IBM will sue them both...
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 5, 2007 22:47 UTC (Wed) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link] Or that both sides will successfully invalidate some of each other's patents, making things easier on future Linux filesystem developers.
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 5, 2007 22:58 UTC (Wed) by ncm (subscriber, #165) [Link] It's unfortunate that in the U.S., when you "invalidate" a patent, the owner is allowed to rewrite its claims to carefully circumscribe the prior art, but still own all of the space around it. Other implementers, in effect, must exactly copy the prior art, or still be threatened. That's what makes the "Peer to Patent" project important: because it works before the patent is issued, the space around the prior art is kept free, too, by "obviousness". If you wait until the patent is issued, it's too late, because then the prior art doesn't radiate any obviousness.
(Or so I'm told. I Am Not A Lawyer.)
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 6, 2007 10:37 UTC (Thu) by trasz (guest, #45786) [Link] IIRC some of this stuff was implemented in LFS, long before WAFL.
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 5, 2007 23:48 UTC (Wed) by butlerm (subscriber, #13312) [Link] One more data point for the proposition that software patents are a net drag on the economy.
Network Appliance suing Sun over ZFS Posted Sep 6, 2007 2:49 UTC (Thu) by jake (editor, #205) [Link] Sun has a response with some interesting allegations:Many of the claims raised in the lawsuit are factually untrue. For example, it was NetApp who first approached Sun seeking to acquire the Sun patents NetApp is now attempting to invalidate. It is unfortunate that NetApp has now resorted to resolving its business issues in a legal jurisdiction (East Texas) long favored by "patent trolls."
East Texas ... Posted Sep 6, 2007 4:13 UTC (Thu) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] In the article you link to, Sun accuses NetApp of picking a jurisdiction (East Texas) favored by patent trolls. Unfortunately, that could mean trouble for Sun if the case reaches trial. They routinely boot everyone who graduated high school and the lawyers ignore the technical issues and try the defendants based on who they are. Making Jonathan Schwartz's ponytail an issue is the kind of tactic that is typical, along with accusations of communist sympathies.A professor I know served as a technical witness for a defendant in a patent suit that went to trial in Texas. The case he'd prepared, to show that the defendant was using a completely different method than the one described in the patent, didn't matter because he was put on trial himself for being a communist hippie professor from Berkeley, trying to defraud a good Texas company. At least in that case the plaintiff company really was based in Texas. Netapp, like Sun, is based in Silicon Valley, California, and it's criminal that they can pick some place to bring suit based on its reputation for always favoring patent plaintiffs. If Sun can't get the case thrown out before trial, they might have to settle.
Remember Tux2? Posted Sep 6, 2007 9:36 UTC (Thu) by mjw (subscriber, #16740) [Link] NetApp also seems to be behind chilling out the Tux2 file system back in 2000:Tux2 - evil patents sighted which in the end seems to have meant that Daniel Phillips stopped developing it and said "Does anybody want to know if patent chill exists, and is it hurting open source? The answer is yes."
|
|||||||||||||