Board index » kylix » Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

Re: Borland patent stops Wine!


2005-05-18 05:19:56 PM
kylix1
XXXX@XXXXX.COM (Thomas Maeder [TeamB]) wrote in
Quote
Andreas Prucha < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:

>A good example why software patents are a bad thing.

Actually, this is not the case.

There are many good examples, but this is not one of them. Because
Borland has never used it to prevent anybody else from doing anything.
May be. But it *could*
Borland may not sue Open Source projects now, but this does not give these
projects the guarantee that Borland (may be with a new management or in
other situations) may use it's patents to sue.
 
 

Re:Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

SiegfriedN < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in news:428b0249
@newsgroups.borland.com:
Quote
Remember:
It is better for all of us to know as little as possible about software
patents.. This way you can not be sued, afaik..
Don't think so. The fact that you did not know about a patent does not
protect you from a lawsuite.
 

Re:Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

XXXX@XXXXX.COM (Thomas Maeder [TeamB]) wrote in
Quote
theo < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:

>I'd say Borland should explicetely grant the rights to use this
>patent in wine.

What about other projects? There's really no way for Borland to know
about all projects that should be treated this way.

The right way for those responsible of the wine project (and any other
project) is to contact Borland.
May be. But who get's the "license" to use the patented technology in the
case of a Open Source project? A person? "The project"? And what about
forks?
Quote
I'm not aware about what you refer to wrt Unisys. IMHO, it is unfair
to compare SCO and Borland.
Unisys decided to use it's LZW patent against websites and others after the
GIF-Format was already widely used.
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

Andreas Prucha < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
Borland may not sue Open Source projects now, but this does not give
these projects the guarantee that Borland (may be with a new
management or in other situations) may use it's patents to sue.
True. Maybe some of them would get such a guarantee if they asked. We
don't know, because they don't ask.
It is not Borland's fault that patents can be both used in their
intended way (i.e. to protect one's investments - I understand this is
Borland's reason for having this patent) and abused for preventing
innovation.
As I wrote, there are many "good" examples for patents being used for
the latter; we don't have evidence that Borland intends to do that,
though.
And no, I am absolutely not in favor of software patents, because they
very rarely work in the way patents should work, but are abused. It is
ironical that a company is attacked for a patent it hasn't abused.
If you want to fight against software patents, be my guest. But pick
out better arguments.
 

Re:Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

Andreas Prucha < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
May be. But who get's the "license" to use the patented technology
in the case of a Open Source project? A person? "The project"? And
what about forks?
IANAL.
There are many lawyers out there. Looks like it's time for one of them
to do something useful :-)
Quote
Unisys decided to use it's LZW patent against websites and others after the
GIF-Format was already widely used.
Oh, that one.
 

Re:Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

SiegfriedN wrote:
Quote
I want to be free to invent 100% of my time. I do not want spend 90%
+ of my time and costs to look over my shoulder those hypothetical
patent I may have hypothetically infringed on. That's what it's all
about..
No where did I say that open source projects didn't invent.
--
www.jed-software.com
 

Re:Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

SiegfriedN wrote:
Quote
Remember:
It is better for all of us to know as little as possible about
software patents.. This way you can not be sued, afaik..
Igorance of the law is not defense of the law.
--
www.jed-software.com
 

Re:Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

Andreas Prucha < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
Quote
The fact that you did not know about a patent does not
protect you from a lawsuite.
It does reduce the damages the patent holder can ask for.
--
Iman
 

Re:Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

XXXX@XXXXX.COM (Thomas Maeder [TeamB]) wrote in
Quote
And no, I am absolutely not in favor of software patents, because they
very rarely work in the way patents should work, but are abused. It is
ironical that a company is attacked for a patent it hasn't abused.
I agree. I would prefere if software companies stopped to patent their
algorithms, but this is not realistic because others may do it. AFAIK it's
not possible to patent somenthing used before, but this is probably
difficult to proof.
So I'd say that software should not be allowed to be patent protected any
more. Unfortunately it seems that the EU is going in the wrong direction.
We did not have this nonense, but it seems that software patents will be
possible.
 

Re:Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

"JED" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in news:xn0e2e9is8062m005
@newsgroups.borland.com:
Quote
SiegfriedN wrote:

>Now this is kinda funny...
>
>Kylix relies on Wine and now a Borland Patent is halting some of it's
>development!!! ???
>
>www.builderau.com.au/program/work/0,39024650,39188400,00.htm
>

I love how once someone sees the word Patent the whole world is going
to end. I also find it amazing that every open source project expects
to be able to just copy things from commerical products all the time
and then get the patents for nothing.
Open Source projects propably *do* get ideas from commercial projects,
but it also works the other way around. The difference is, that ideas
from Open Source projects are often not protected. Some Open Source
projects (Non-GPL) even allow that the source is used in commerical
projects. So no, it's not a one-way-ticket.
Quote
Patents cost money, but make an
invention public which might never be known.
Huh?
Quote
Everyone says how great IBM are with giving opening their patents to
eclipse and other projects. You don't think IBM has a reason to do
this. Eclipse (an open source project) has affected JBuilder sales so
why should Borland just roll over all the time (not saying or knowing
if they will or not).
And what will you say when Borland gets an idea from a Open Source
project? Will you say "Bad Bad Borland. Don't do that" ... or will you
just happily accept the feature?
IMO software patents prevent innovation. People have learned from each
other and improved ideas they got from someone else all the time. Patents
hurt this process because it's not just the "origial" idea which is
protected, but also improvements of the original idea. Patents are often
too general.
And nobody can check for patents all the time. It's very likely that
almost every slightly more complexe piece of software violates one or
another patent.
 

Re:Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

Andreas Prucha wrote:
Quote
So I'd say that software should not be allowed to be patent protected any
more. Unfortunately it seems that the EU is going in the wrong direction.
We did not have this nonense, but it seems that software patents will be
possible.
Not if the democratically elected parliament has it's way ( which if it
does not there could be trouble ;) ) - they have re-drafted the
exclusion to prevent the bulk of software ONLY patents.
We keep our fingers crossed in Europe!
--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services
 

Re:Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

Thomas Maeder [TeamB] sighed and wrote::
Quote
theo < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:


>I'd say Borland should explicetely grant the rights to use this
>patent in wine.


What about other projects? There's really no way for Borland to know
about all projects that should be treated this way.

The right way for those responsible of the wine project (and any other
project) is to contact Borland.



>There's not much to loose and it would shed a good light on
>the company.
>Remember Unisys or SCO: They look like looser companies to anyone who
>knows about what they did.


I'm not aware about what you refer to wrt Unisys. IMHO, it is unfair
to compare SCO and Borland.
That would defintitely be derogatory to Borland to have it mentioned
with (or even compared to) a company such as SCO. Even having Borland
being on the same statement as *censored* is insulting.
Edmund
Edmund
 

Re:Re: Borland patent stops Wine!

JED sighed and wrote::
Quote
SiegfriedN wrote:


>Remember:
>It is better for all of us to know as little as possible about
>software patents.. This way you can not be sued, afaik..


Igorance of the law is not defense of the law.

So what you are implying is that instead of reactively
waiting for lawsuits, one must actively search high and
low for all software patents and determine whether
or not each part of one's code violate any known
software patent? (Ok, possibly an fallacious point.)
What about the Patent Pendings?
Since most commercial in-house built software systems
are kept, well, in-house (ie. under lock and key
within the company), no one else can know whether
or not any part of the code contains patent violations.
The part that kind of puzzles me is that say in
such a company, a junior developer somehow finds out
part of the company code violates a patent.
As you said, feigning ignorance is not
a defense of the law, so ignoring the said
violation is not an option. Blow the whistle
on the company? Come to terms with the
rest of the development team and come up
with a possible work-around? Sounds logical,
but this will necessarily be 'wasting' the
team's time doing something over again. And
you know what happens when you do something
over again and the notorious introduction of
more bugs.
Here's where I'm confused and might just indicate
how useless a software patent is unless the
violating software is a publicly known/open-sourced
project. Perhaps you can clarify whether I've
analysed this properly.
From the software patent holder, it cannot
be feasible or even possible to make sure his/her
patent isn't being used without your express
permission. I think I can say it is impossible
for such a patent holder to attempt at checking
*every* system for patent infraction. Open source
is easier, but what about the countless of in-house
systems in private companies? He has no knowledge
or will *never* have access to any of the code.
From a software developer's point of view, it's not
feasible/possible to search one's code and compare
it to the patented routines. There's really
not enough time in the day to do both software
developing and checking patents, or as someone
on this thread mentioned, 'looking behind
one's shoulder.'(paraphrased..)
Thankfully, Borland isn't going after Wine, but I do
agree that they should consider consulting Borland.
But I guess them finding work-arounds do at least give
credence to their motto of having a fully free-software
without any legal 'entanglements'. :)
Edmund