Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: ARC patent

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>,pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ARC patent
Date: 2005-01-17 19:48:46
Message-ID: 9533.1105991326@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>> What will you do if the patent is granted, 8.0 is out there with the
>> offending code, and you get a cease-and-desist letter from IBM
>> demanding the removal of all offending code from the Net?

> We can modify the code slightly to hopefully avoid the patent.  With the
> US granting patents on even obvious ideas, I would think that most large
> software projects, including commercial ones, already have tons of
> patent violations in their code.  Does anyone think otherwise?

I think there is zero probability of being sued by IBM in the near
future.  They would instantly destroy the credibility and good
relationships they've worked so hard to build up with the entire
open source community.

However, I don't want to be beholden to IBM indefinitely --- in five
years their corporate strategy might change.  I think that a reasonable
response to this is to plan to get rid of ARC, or at least modify the
code enough to avoid the patent, in time for 8.1.  (It's entirely likely
that that will happen before the patent issues, anyway.)

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-01-17 19:54:44
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] %2$, %1$ gettext placeholder replacement is not working under Win32
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2005-01-17 19:46:32
Subject: Contrib make inconsistency

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group