Ühel kenal päeval (esmaspäev, 17. jaanuar 2005, 23:22+0000), kirjutas
> On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 14:02 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > >IBM can NEVER sue customers for using infringing
> > >code before first informing them of infringement and
> > >giving reasonable time to upgrade to uninfringing
> > >version.
> It seems clear that anybody on 8.0.0ARC after the patent had been
> granted could potentially be liable to pay damages. At best, the
> community would need to do a "product recall" to ensure patents were not
> So, it also seems clear that 8.0.x should eventually have a straight
> upgrade path to a replacement, assuming the patent is granted.
> We should therefore plan to:
> 1. improve/replace ARC for 8.1
"improved" ARC still needs licence from IBM if they get the patent and
our "improved" one infringes any claims in it.
Actually getting patents on all useful improvements on existing patent
has been a known winning strategy in corporate patent hardball - you
force the original patent holder to negotiate, as he's rendered unable
to improve his design without infringing your patents. IIRC some early
electronic consumer devices were wrangled out of single company control
We could consider donating our improvements to some free patent
foundation to be patented for this kind of action plan.
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Serguei A. Mokhov||Date: 2005-01-20 01:23:33|
|Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers] Daily digest v1.4918 (23 messages)|
|Previous:||From: Hannu Krosing||Date: 2005-01-20 00:54:27|
|Subject: Re: ARC patent|