Re: [OT] use of patented algorithms in the kernel ok or not?

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > I know that equivalent code, which is covered by most if not all of
> > > the patents, is sold by some software companies to product developers
> > > _in the USA_ without prelicensed patents.  The problem of acquiring
> > > suitable patent licenses is left to the purchasers.
> > > 
> > > Rationally I would expect that if someone is able to sell code and
> > > leave the problem of patent licensing to the purchaser, then one
> > > should be able to _give away_ code and leave the problem of patent
> > > licensing to the recipient.
> > 
> > As far as I can see, it is okay to ignore patents *if
> > you are doing research*. So you should be able to offer
> > it to US people for research purposes.
> 
> According to recently passed legislation, this may no longer be true.  It 
> remains to be tested, but my understanding is that this "research" shield
> is now gone.

Time to move to Cuba?

[Well, I thought that explicit reason for patents is "to promote
research", and it used to be okay to improve upon someone else's
patent. If patents no longer serve that purpose (if you can't improve
upon someone elses work, it is worse than he keeping it secret; and
patents were made so that people would not keep stuff secret), perhaps
its time to ask if they are still constitutional?]
								Pavel

-- 
When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/