| From: | Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com>, Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: How can we submit code patches that implement our (pending) patents? |
| Date: | 2018-07-25 07:06:22 |
| Message-ID: | 5B58216E.7080607@anastigmatix.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 07/25/18 01:56, Nico Williams wrote:
> Wrong. With patents the important thing is not to know about them when
> you implement -- if you come up with the same idea by accident (which,
> of course, is obviously entirely possible) then you are not subject to
> trebble damages.
Even if the damages are not trebled, can 1✕ the damages be more than you
would like to shell out? Not to mention the hassle of getting any infringing
uses to cease?
Also, is this distinction universally applied across jurisdictions?
-Chap
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2018-07-25 07:27:48 | Re: [HACKERS] Optional message to user when terminating/cancelling backend |
| Previous Message | jonasmehler46 | 2018-07-25 06:38:16 | Re: How can we submit code patches that implement our (pending) patents? |