Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 15:27:04 +0300 From: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: Chris Mason <mason@suse.com>, Josh MacDonald <jmacd@CS.Berkeley.EDU>, Parity Error <bootup@mail.ru>, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com Subject: Re: [reiserfs-dev] Re: metadata update durability ordering/soft updates Message-ID: <3C948B98.2080703@namesys.com> References: <E16lReK-000C3T-00@f10.mail.ru> <3C910C57.71C2D823@mindspring.com> <20020315065651.02637@helen.CS.Berkeley.EDU> <3C923C91.454D7710@mindspring.com> <1562810000.1016224776@tiny> <3C928D21.404EA11D@mindspring.com> <1714680000.1016298986@tiny> <3C93BBF1.7E8801DF@mindspring.com> <3C946B57.3060403@namesys.com> <3C946B33.888F2281@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote: >Hans Reiser wrote: > >>Oh this is crap. There is nothing that Chris does in our journaling >>code that wasn't already done in databases for years before this patent >>was issued. (Chris, while you implement better than they did, I don't >>think your architecture is at all new.) >> > >This is irrelevent to the legal system. > No, it is called prior art. It is entirely relevant. > > >>As for your claiming you don't want to discuss it, this is bullshit, >> > >As a Senior Software Engineer for Novell UNIX Systems Group, >which integrated the former USL in June of 1994, in late 1994, >during which time my primary job responsibilities included >developing an attributed FS for UNIX for use in the NetWare >for UNIX 4.x, I reviewed the DOW patent claims and materials >prior to the filing by the authors. > >This event should be verifiable with Bryan Sparks, Gary >Tomlinson, Jim Freeman, Darren Davis, and other people >curently or formerly working for Caldera Systems, in Orem >Utah, and well known to the Linux community. Actually, I'm >pretty sure Jim Freeman reviewec the same documents. > >It is my opinion that the ReiserFS management of preserve >lists probably infringes US Patent 5666532. It's no secret > Preserve lists were removed from the code by Chris Mason years ago. > >that I hold this opinion; I have posted consistently on it > you mean, you told everyone but me, the author/inventor of preserve lists. > >for several years, ever since the 0.2 release of ReiserFS >included Write Ordering for shifted tree items. I can give >you list references back at least a year, or even earlier, >if I hit my offline mail archives. > >It's also no secret that I think it's easy to get around >this by changing from DOW technology to the Ganger/Patt >Soft Updates technology, which would make it a non-issue. > We use journaling. Have done so for years. > > > >>you are spreading FUD about our product in a potential future >>market for ReiserFS in a manner that could discourage someone >>from paying for the port. This is extremely irresponsible. >>Don't pretend to be friendly, your actions are quite >>harmful and irresponsible. >> > >Actually, the ReiserFS-Dev list was added to the Cc: line >of a thread on the FreeBSD-FS list by Josh McDonald; I >would just as soon not be quoted in part and out of context >on a list where the entire thread was not archived. If >I had noticed the addition, I would have removed it from >the "Cc:" list befre replying to his posting. > You prefer to say bad things behind people's backs, so that you never find out if they are untrue, and sales are lost without my ever knowing why. > > >For FreeBSD, unless you are building a commercial product >based on FreeBSD and negotiate a seperate license, ReiserFS >under the GPL is a no-op, since you could not ship a binary >for FreeBSD that was capable of booting off ReiserFS, due >to license incompatability with the GPL. This is the same > We would charge for any FreeBSD port, and the license would be a limiting (proprietary or GPL) license. There are probably appliance vendors and the like who would find this of interest. > >technicality that keeps the FreeBSD community from supporting, >in a non-fringe way, a port of XFS or JFS to FreeBSD. > >FWIW: almost every UNIX vendor to whom you would market the >code has a license for SVR4.2, which includes a license for >use of the DOW Patents, so it's a non-issue for most >potential commerical licensees of the code. > > >If it makes you any happier, SQUID infringes at least 5 IBM >patents. When I was employed by IBM, we were forced to remove >it from an unreleased IBM product (they acquired our company >prior to releasing the product) to avoid granting royalty free >licenses to use those patents to anyone who bought a $1500 >product and demanded the sources to the SQUID code from IBM >under the terms of the GPL. > >Just because a company has a patent doesn't mean it will sue; >if the patent had been transferred from Novell to SCO along >with USL, the problem would be moot. As it is, I'm not sure >whether or not the license is sublicensable (I assume that >it is), so the shipping ReiserFS on Caldera's OpenLinux >Workstation 3.1 may in fact destroy the enforcibility of the >patent by Novell, in any case. The people to ask on that are >Caldera; my assumptions are not strong enough for me to take >the risk, so they shouldn't be strong enough for you. > >My opinion of software patents is probably lower than yours, >but they are a fact of life in this business. > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C948B98.2080703>