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

How to handle C&D's?

From: Joshua Kramer <josh(at)globalherald(dot)net>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: How to handle C&D's?
Date: 2008-10-24 15:14:12
Message-ID: alpine.LFD.2.00.0810241104460.944@dhcppc0 (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
> pending and granted in the project's areas of development.  By doing
> this, in the worst case you remain ignorant, and later get a cease and
> desist letter.  If you start looking for things, you implicitly

Has anybody thought about how you'd handle a C&D in terms of communicating 
to users?  If somebody at Bob's House of IP Enforcers sends someone on the 
PG team a C&D that says Feature XYZ violates their patent, and it is found 
to be true by the PG team - then what?

If we imagine just a little further and say that there are various 
commercial and open source projects, in which the availabilty of Feature 
XYZ is ingrained into the system - they can't function without it - then 

If PGDG communicated the C&D, then commercial interests could point to the 
problem and say "that's why you don't use Open Source!"  Those who have 
knowledge of how things actually are would know that it would be an 
indictment of the patent system itself, but the situation would be one 
more tool in the bag of tricks of those who want to discourage the use of 
Open Source in general and PG in particular.

I know, preaching to the choir - but is the philosophical issue something 
we need to hash out and plan for?


-Josh Kramer

GlobalHerald.NET, the Smarter Social Network! (tm)

In response to


pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Robert TreatDate: 2008-10-24 15:35:13
Subject: Re: specificity of claims (was: SEPostgres - on track for 8.4?)
Previous:From: Andrew SullivanDate: 2008-10-24 15:05:32
Subject: Re: How to handle C&D's?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group