Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 02:24:54 -0600 From: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> To: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in> Cc: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com>, David Johnson <djohnson@acuson.com>, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD Message-ID: <3AE143D6.2C4742B4@softweyr.com> References: <20010418091652.A27000@lpt.ens.fr> <007201c0c7e1$65489b00$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> <20010418103127.F27000@lpt.ens.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Rahul Siddharthan wrote:
>
> Ted Mittelstaedt said on Apr 18, 2001 at 01:27:24:
> > >Consider the following scenario: Apple has a patent on some very
> > >low-level algorithm, but doesn't tell people. (They do claim a patent
> > >on theming, so why not on some OS-related thing?) Their people (no
> > >doubt well-meaning) contribute it to FreeBSD.
> >
> > The second that an Apple employee formally contributed patented source
> > to FreeBSD, it would tremendously weaken the Apple patent to the point
> > where it would impede it's enforceability.
>
> As I understand it (IANAL), non-enforcement of patents doesn't weaken
> them (unlike trademarks, where you do have to enforce them actively).
You're right, but non-enforcement and contribution are not the same.
If Apple contributed patented source to FreeBSD and released it under
BSD-ish license terms, that means that anyone can use it on the same
terms as you and I.
> Unisys waited for years, until GIFs became entrenched standards on the
> web, before trying to enforce their LZW patent. Many big corporations
> did pay up.
Probably not comparable, Unisys didn't publish or contribute the LZW code.
--
"Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
Wes Peters Softweyr LLC
wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3AE143D6.2C4742B4>