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

Re: ARC patent

From: "Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>
To: "Jan Wieck" <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>,"pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ARC patent
Date: 2005-01-17 20:56:00
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> >> FYI, IBM has applied for a patent on ARC (AFAICS the patent application
> >> is still pending, although the USPTO site is a little hard to grok):
> > 
> >> 
> > 
> > Ugh.  We could hope that the patent wouldn't be granted, but I think
> > it unlikely, unless Jan is aware of prior art (like a publication
> > predating the filing date).  I fear we'll have to change or remove
> > that code.
> > 
> > 			regards, tom lane
> Unfortunately no. The document that inspired me to adapt ARC for 
> PostgreSQL is from the USENIX File & Storage Technologies Conference 
> (FAST), March 31, 2003, San Francisco, CA.
> I am seriously concerned about this and think we should not knowingly 
> release code that is possibly infringing a patent.

I thought IBM granted the right to use these methods in OSS software.
PostgreSQL is OSS software, thus only such entities relicensing pg
need to worry about the patent. 
Also the algo is probably sufficiently altered already to not be subject 
to the patent, no ?



pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-01-17 20:57:53
Subject: Re: ARC patent
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-01-17 20:48:38
Subject: Re: ARC patent

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group