Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 18 Apr 2001 08:11:15 -0700
From:      "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com>
To:        "Rahul Siddharthan" <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in>
Cc:        "David Johnson" <djohnson@acuson.com>, <freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   RE: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD
Message-ID:  <007301c0c819$d03d74c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20010418103127.F27000@lpt.ens.fr>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It's not the non-enforcement of patents that is what weakens
them.  For example, AT&T's copyrights wern't weakened by
inclusion of their code into BSD, thus they had a case
to sue UCB.

The weakening happens if the copyrighted source has it's
copyright changed, which is what would happen if it was
contributed to the OS.

It used to be that when a company (like Apple) contributed
code to a UNIX (like BSD) they were allowed to keep their own
copyright on the code and just have it included in the
distribution.  After the AT&T lawsuit, BSD doesen't allow this
anymore.  If your a company and you want to contribute your
own copyrighted source to FreeBSD, you can only do this via the
ports mechanism.  (ie: build a port for your stuff)  You can not
get it into the kernel unless you agree to change the copyright
to give BSD perpetual control over it.

With the Unisys deal, Unisys never gave permission to change the
copyright in LZW.

Ted Mittelstaedt                      tedm@toybox.placo.com
Author of:          The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide
Book website:         http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com


>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG
>[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Rahul
>Siddharthan
>Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 1:31 AM
>To: Ted Mittelstaedt
>Cc: David Johnson; freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG
>Subject: Re: Windriver, Slackware and FreeBSD
>
>
>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).
>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.
>
>- Rahul
>
>To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
>with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
>

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?007301c0c819$d03d74c0$1401a8c0>