I accept that it was an honest doubt, and I apologize if my accusation implied otherwise. That patent is far too late to cover techniques that old.
That patent indeed mentions that particular paper: as prior art.
There is enough genuine work in searching, avoiding, and working around patent issues that it's a little irritating when when someone throws out some spurious allegation and spreads uncertainty.
One of the things that makes FUD so potent is that its spread in all earnestly. People see a comment and then make a "oh yea, that thing was patented" note in their mind.
If you're interested in doing patent research for new coding efforts, it would be great to have more help— though it takes some effort to learn the byzantine language used in patent claims and the convoluted rules around applicability.
Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds