Re: Patent warning about the Greenplum source code

On 11/02/2015 02:41 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 1 November 2015 at 07:47, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
> <mailto:bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 01:27:13AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 04:47:35AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Therefore, I caution people from viewing the Greenplum source
> code as
> > > you might see patented ideas that could be later implemented in
> > > Postgres, opening Postgres up to increased patent violation
> problems. I
> > > am also concerned about existing community members who work for
> > > Pivotal/Greenplum and therefore are required to view the
> patented source
> > > code. The license issue might eventually be improved by
> > > Pivotal/Greenplum, but, for now, I think caution is necessary.
> > >
> > > Of course, never mention known-patented ideas in any community
> forum,
> > > including this email list.
> >
> > I just found out that Citus Data has patent applications pending, so
> > viewing Citus Data source code has the same problems as Greenplum.
>
> Actually, it might only be their closed source software that contains
> patents, i.e. not pg_shard. I will check and report back when I can
> unless someone else reports here first.
>
>
> While you are doing that, please also check EnterpriseDB. My
> information is that there are patents filed there, so we must check
> that just as much as any other company or person. If you didn't know
> before, you do now.
>
> I am disappointed that your approach to this appears unbalanced and
> partisan. Worse, Greenplum have been quite vocal about their
> intentions, so any feedback you have could easily have been given many
> months ago, not on the day of their announcement. I think you should
> have declared this situation in a very different way to the way you
> have approached this. 5 minutes thought on whether other companies
> might also have been affected would have been sensible, plus the whole
> thing could have been discussed completely offlist. If you do discuss
> things on-list then you should at least state for the record that you
> are an EnterpriseDB employee when discussing your concerns, since that
> is likely to have a material affect on how this situation is viewed by
> anyone worried by your post.

FWIW, Bruce has --for as long as I can remember-- always sent e-mail to
the list including a signature similar to the following:
-----
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
-----

So I guess his affiliation with EnterpriseDB is pretty clear even
to outsiders just perusing the archives.
Others' interests are IMHO not nearly as clear from their e-mails'
contents, though.

(not that I have any particular voice/opinion on this matter anyway. I
am precluded from taking a look at any such release for the time being
for other reasons...)

I do thank you for all the time you devote to Postgres. All
community members' contributions are very much appreciated.

/ J.L.