From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 3 22:21:27 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2994E106564A for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 22:21:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from perrin@apotheon.com) Received: from oproxy9.bluehost.com (oproxy9.bluehost.com [IPv6:2605:dc00:100:2::a2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DD1B98FC08 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 22:21:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 21012 invoked by uid 0); 3 Aug 2012 22:21:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box543.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.143) by oproxy9.bluehost.com with SMTP; 3 Aug 2012 22:21:26 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=apotheon.com; s=default; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date; bh=Xu1ddYd/vLKTK4n1DUK1iVCrkXObNk6l+0nqFaS67Lo=; b=gCo/tQW/PfkajOXwUnjoHFNahEIe6b3qziW81Ip/MBgmF2E964bYQXpiTHP3kaIYjcVUtws3cHToj5IMVgH49A+aTUKHDhcJmf5/zWkLRxF9ivNa5WCWLuQNB1qiwkda; Received: from [24.8.180.234] (port=61353 helo=localhost) by box543.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SxQFJ-0000jS-U0 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 03 Aug 2012 16:21:26 -0600 Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 16:21:25 -0600 From: Chad Perrin To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20120803222125.GE26239@hemlock.hydra> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <20120802185759.GB12255@hemlock.hydra> <20120803081433.0ad12c03@AMD620.ovitrap.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120803081433.0ad12c03@AMD620.ovitrap.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Identified-User: {2737:box543.bluehost.com:apotheon:apotheon.com} {sentby:smtp auth 24.8.180.234 authed with perrin@apotheon.com} Subject: Re: Patent hit - MS goes after Linux - FreeBSD ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2012 22:21:27 -0000 On Fri, Aug 03, 2012 at 08:14:33AM +0700, Erich Dollansky wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 12:57:59 -0600 > Chad Perrin wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:39:21PM +0000, Traiano Welcome wrote: > > > > > > Unfortunately, patent law and copyright law are very different > > environments. The truth is that probably every nontrivial piece of > > yes. > > > software created infringes several patents, and the only question that > > remains is whether those patents would hold up in court under close > > The best tool against any patents is prior art. . . . assuming you have enough resources to throw at lawyers to effectively fight your case in court. > > The open source scene misses a very simple platform. Even FreeBSD could > offer an extra list named 'prior-art' on which people can publish their > ideas. The moment the server starts distributing the e-mail, nobody can > claim a patent anywhere in the world for the idea mentioned. That would be nice. > > > scrutiny. The greater the disparity in legal expertise and funding > > behind the two parties, the greater the likelihood that the case will > > be found in favor of the party with the greater resources. > > Not true for cases of prior art. Do lawyers not use the law to their clients' advatage -- often abusing it -- just because they're wrong in the final analysis? That is not what I have seen. What I have seen is that a company like SCO can drag out proceedings for most of a decade (2003 to 2010 before the final nail in the Novell v. SCO matter was pounded in, but SCO is *still* suing IBM) when it not only cannot produce evidence of any infringing code, but doesn't even own the copyrights in question. It would take substantially less than a year for a big corporation to make my little LLC go under, regardless of how good a lawyer I can find. In fact, the better the lawyer, the more quickly I'm likely to run out of money to fight the case, because of the rate I'd have to pay a better lawyer. An accountant would be a better investment, to help me save as much money as possible in the midst of a full-scale legal retreat. Contrary to what you seem to want to imply here, in civil suits the guy with the resources usually wins -- especially in matters like patent infringement, where a bunch of hand-wavy nonsense on a piece of paper can usually be interpreted however the better funded legal team wants it to be interpreted. > > > > This is the reason software patents comprise such a blight on the > > world of software development. Even a frivolous patent that would > > There is no difference for an engineer who works in other fields. That's a fair statement. I wasn't trying to exclude other fields; I was just speaking specifically about software development. > > > not hold up through completion of litigation may serve its purpose by > > bankrupting a defendant before the case is concluded. > > That party must have a real dumb patent attorney then. . . . or very little money relative to the other party. I suppose dollars are equivalent to IQ points in your view. > > > > It is possible that Microsoft is going the way of SCO -- into its > > grave, having hung all its hopes on litigation. Along the way, > > though, it will probably do a lot of damage to a lot of people, > > projects, and businesses, and I just hope it doesn't get as far as > > the FreeBSD project or any FreeBSD users before things come crashing > > down. > > It is all in the people's mind. I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here. > > > (disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. Et > > cetera.) > > This is an example of the real problem. What -- the fact that I understand the law enough to not want to get sued by someone who's dumb enough to take advice from a mailing list on how to handle a patent suit? Are you a patent lawyer? If not, perhaps the real problem in this exchange is *your* lack of understanding of how things work. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]