From: Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@gnu.org>
To: jw schultz <jw@pegasys.ws>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [OT] use of patented algorithms in the kernel ok or not?
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 14:40:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031221194040.GG30397@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031221012504.GB21001@pegasys.ws>
On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 05:25:04PM -0800, jw schultz wrote:
> > What am I to do? Ignore the patent? Or should I refrain from submitting
> > the patch I wrote, and look for an unencumbered algorithm instead?
>
> This whole thing seems strange to me.
>
> Why do you even know the algorithm is patented? And if you
> knew it was, why implement it? If you implemented it and
> then did a search you poisoned yourself.
I implemented the algorithm, and before submitting it, I asked
the authors of the paper I used to implement the algorithm what
the patent status of this algorithm is. The paper doesn't say
anything about any patents (in retrospect, obviously it wouldn't.)
> I've not poked around in the routing code but it seems to me
> that the kernel would need a longest-prefix match algorithm
> already so you shouldn't have to look far for one.
There is one already, and it's suboptimal, to say it mildly.
> As for asking the patent holder for a license. If the
> patent were owned by a network hardware company i cannot see
> them licensing it because the speed of their equipment is
> their competitive advantage. But you indicated the the
> patent is not owned by the HW company but exclusively
> licensed. An existing exclusive license would preclude
> FLOSS being granted a license and a gratis sublicense would
> likely violate the existing license.
I asked this question on l-k because there seem to be many 'common'
techniques in wide use which have US patents covering them.
Considering the circumstances, yes, licensing is probably out of the
question.
> It would be completely OT to wonder at what point source
> code crossed the line of expressing information of public
> record into being a patent violation. <niggle>
I wouldn't be surprised if publishing source code implementing a patented
algorithm would itself be considered as a patent violation (I'm not saying
that it would make sense to me though.)
I think this l-k thread was sufficiently instructive for me to decide that
I won't be publishing my implementation of this algorithm, and I'll just
wait until another (free) LPM algorithm pops up.
--L
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-12-21 19:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-12-18 23:11 [OT] use of patented algorithms in the kernel ok or not? Lennert Buytenhek
2003-12-19 6:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-12-19 7:38 ` Paul Jackson
2003-12-19 8:47 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-12-19 11:38 ` Jan-Benedict Glaw
2003-12-20 17:28 ` Stefan Traby
2003-12-21 10:33 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-12-21 16:57 ` Pavel Machek
2004-01-13 15:35 ` Chuck Campbell
2004-01-13 19:35 ` Pavel Machek
2004-01-13 21:04 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-12-22 0:37 ` jw schultz
2003-12-21 23:39 ` Lennert Buytenhek
2003-12-21 1:25 ` jw schultz
2003-12-21 19:40 ` Lennert Buytenhek [this message]
2003-12-21 1:12 Albert Cahalan
2003-12-21 10:53 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-12-21 13:35 ` James Morris
2003-12-21 14:30 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-12-21 16:03 ` Xavier Bestel
2003-12-21 14:56 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-12-21 19:33 ` Stan Bubrouski
2003-12-21 23:25 ` Helge Hafting
2003-12-21 19:29 ` Stan Bubrouski
2003-12-21 19:55 ` Matthias Schniedermeyer
2003-12-21 20:11 ` Stan Bubrouski
2003-12-21 21:52 ` Francois Romieu
2003-12-21 21:57 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-12-22 9:50 ` John Bradford
2003-12-22 15:34 ` Adrian Cox
2003-12-22 1:43 James Lamanna
2003-12-22 11:32 ` Matti Aarnio
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20031221194040.GG30397@gnu.org \
--to=buytenh@gnu.org \
--cc=jw@pegasys.ws \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).