From: Earnie B. <ear...@ya...> - 2002-08-22 21:08:04
|
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Linus: kernel development no longer legally possible Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 15:11:22 -0400 (EDT) -- from another list -- <QUOTE> In case anyone hasn't seen this... See http://lwn.net/Articles/7001/ Memory management and patents Linux VM hackers are engaged in ongoing discussions on both large page support (covered last week) and improving the performance of the new reverse mapping mechanism. That conversation slowed down, however, when Alan Cox pointed out that a number of the techniques being discussed are covered by SGI patents. In fact, a closer look by Daniel Phillips shows that a number of existing Linux technologies, including reverse mapping in general and the buddy allocator, are covered by these patents. This is a problem, he said, that we can't ignore. That was Linus's cue to jump in with his policy on software patents and kernel code: I do not look up any patents on _principle_, because (a) it's a horrible waste of time and (b) I don't want to know. The fact is, technical people are better off not looking at patents. If you don't know what they cover and where they are, you won't be knowingly infringing on them. If somebody sues you, you change the algorithm or you just hire a hit-man to whack the stupid git. Linus followed up with a note that the above "may not be legally tenable advice." But he sticks by his point that, anymore, it's impossible to write an interesting program without running into somebody's patent. Rather than worry about it, it's better to just proceed and deal with any problems as they emerge. This is probably the only rational approach; otherwise kernel hackers would go nuts trying to find and avoid all of the applicable patents. It's probably only a matter of time, though, until one of these patents bites the kernel in a big way - at least in the U.S. Those are the times we live in, though. Unfortunately the times are the same in Europe. There are hundreds and thousands of EPO patents on basic memory managment calculus with the same claim scope as their USPTO counter parts, and the European Commission as well as some leading people in the European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee (Lord Inglewood and Arlene McCarthy) seem determined to legalise these patents and make an even bigger flood of similar patents unavoidable in Europe. </QUOTE> Interesting note. However, is ignorance a defense? Earnie. |