Linmodems Mailing list Archives

	Web archives.linmodems.org

Return-Path: <rickg@UDel.Edu>
Mailing-List: contact discuss-help@linmodems.org; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list discuss@linmodems.org
Received: (qmail 24132 invoked from network); 5 Mar 2000 15:20:24 -0000
Received: from copland.udel.edu (128.175.13.92)
  by www.linmodems.org with SMTP; 5 Mar 2000 15:20:24 -0000
Received: from udel.edu (IDENT:rickg@ppp-kce-as1-12.nss.udel.edu [128.175.240.14])
	by copland.udel.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA23684
	for <discuss@linmodems.org>; Sun, 5 Mar 2000 10:19:50 -0500 (EST)
Sender: rickg@UDel.Edu
Message-ID: <38C27B52.A525846E@udel.edu>
Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 10:20:50 -0500
From: Rich Seagraves <rickg@UDel.Edu>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.12-20 i586)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: discuss@linmodems.org
Subject: Re: Patents?
References: <200003051312.aa67397@hamilton.maths.tcd.ie> <38C2621C.1AB93844@coppice.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Steve Underwood wrote:

> stevop@maths.tcd.ie wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Interesting strategy...  maybe you can extend it further like:
> > >
> > > Implement the code to infringe.  Inform the patent holder that you
> > > are infringing.  If the patent owner does not drag you to court
> > > within some statute of limitation (1 year?), then by law, the owner
> > > has "abandoned" the patent and it is now in the public domain a wee
> > > bit earlier than 17 years.  You have done a great service to mankind!
> > >
> > > There is a downside (left as an exercise for the reader's imagination).
> > > Too bad free legal support is nowhere as plentiful as free software.
> > >
> > > -- Minh
> >
> > Supposing you do try something like this, who gets in trouble? As I see it
> > there is no linmodem corporate body, so do they sue everyone who contributes
> > code, whoever they see to be organising it or what?
>
> I believe the patent laws in most countries have exceptions for research and
> experimental purposes. In that case producing "some code" is not a patent
> violation. However, packaging it all neatly into an easy to install product is
> asking for trouble for the packager.
>
> Steve

If you ask me this seems like a terrible idea.  Because if you get caught, asides
from the obvious legal penalties that could be attached (I personally don't want
to risk jail over just watching the building of free software winmodem support),
but you immediately give all of free software a black eye.  With it's money and
media might, do you have any idea what kind of power microsoft would have with
this?

In the NY Times next week:

"Free Software breaks the law", and some story is chumped up that discredits the
entire free software movement.  In days free software could be embarrassed and
public opinion could be turned against ALL free software projects.

I'm not saying that's going to happen if this plan proceeds, but it's a definate
possibility, and you have to wonder if it's worth the risk.