[dvlug] Linux FUD patent dispute

[Grant Bowman]

Thanks to Dion from the Felton LUG http://feltonlug.sturdywebs.com/
for his insights about this recent news article.

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9216070/Google_found_guilty_of_patent_infringement_for_using_Linux

I provide it here for our discussion and/or join their list to
participate. http://groups.google.com/group/felton-lug

Grant


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dion L. Johnson II <dionj at comcast.net>
Date: Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 2:14 PM
Subject: RE: [Felton LUG] Linux loses in court case over patent dispute
To: felton-lug at googlegroups.com

If it were simply a matter of granting exclusive rights to that
complex algorithm for a particular commercial process or machine, it
would be easier to implement.

Originally, the creators of the patent scheme wanted to encourage
inventors and artisans to make new, profitable devices that would
benefit all of society.    The idea was that, rather than having the
government bestow prizes or titles to inventors, the founders decided
to provide for these creators of unique new machines or processes to
get a guaranteed way to make money (the Yankee nobility)… but only for
a limited time, and it was expected that after some period of time
during which the original inventor got rich, then others would improve
on the machine/process because the patent revealed how the device was
made and its principles of operation.  Hence the public benefit as the
new technology came into public use.

The trouble is, from the very beginning, clever lawyers (and the
inventors represented) sought to obtain patents that were more general
than was implemented in a single machine or process.   Sam Colt pretty
much locked up the entire concept of revolving cartridge-cylinder
guns, and arguably prevented other inventors and creators of similar
guns from operating commercially, for 20 years.   Was “progress”
inhibited?  I think so.   Look what happened after Remington,
Smith&Wesson, et al got into the business.   Even so, the Colt company
remained the preeminent mfr of revolvers essentially for ever after.
I think the Colt company succeeded more because of the brilliance of
design, quality of implementation, and ongoing improvements to the
product; not because they had an early exclusive on the idea.

>From such beginnings, we have seen develop the concepts of
“intellectual property” – essentially, the ownership of ideas.   It’s
an evil and foetid concept, and inhibits development of new devices
and processes.

If you’ve looked into it, you’ve seen the quagmire involved in
software patents.   Trivial and obvious stuff does indeed get patented
because patent examiners are not so vastly wise and educated that they
can determine whether a new program contains some unique, non-obvious,
ingenious code.

And even if a program might embody some (maybe several) unique ideas
and concepts, what about the vast base of IP upon which that program
was built?  Which enabled that program to exist at all?   Every
program owes its very existence to other, lower level programs,
hardware, and science that comprise the operating environment.

The question is not “why should some particular algorithm not be
patentable?”.   The more important question is why should ANY
algorithm or code be patentable?  Given that they are ALL derived from
preceding technologies, programming techniques, and the elaborate
structures of physical and mathematical sciences upon which they are
built.

That’s a little bit of why software patents, and by extension,  IP
ownership are a bad idea.   Ask Richard Stallman  (FSF.org,
stallman.org, etc) for much more lucid explanations of this.

Of course, the foregoing is my own opinion, and I can understand how
other people might envision a modern world in which intellectual
progress, invention, development, research, commercialization are
conducted by command/control agencies that govern society closely.   I
do not believe that such authority-driven models are good for a free
society where liberty is valued.

-Dion



From: felton-lug at googlegroups.com [mailto:felton-lug at googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Jeremy Sturdivant
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 12:53 PM
To: felton-lug at googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Felton LUG] Linux loses in court case over patent dispute

Ordinary patents are just mechanical "recipes," what makes them more
eligible to be patented? Just like the idea of someone patenting the
inclined plane is a bit over the top, nobody should be able to claim a
patent for say, a linked list, but why should a complex algorithm be
non-patentable?

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Dion L. Johnson II <dionj at comcast.net> wrote:

It all started with the idea that one should be able to patent
algorithms, which are just mathematical recipes.   If you have just
one implementation of some programming schema, then you apparently get
to patent that idea against all other users and implementors.  It’s
total BS and an example of governmental overreach.   The original
concepts of patents was not designed to work this way.

Big companies like IBM and Microsoft have thousands (tens of
thousands?) of software and concept patents that they do not
aggressively litigate.

-Dion


From: felton-lug at googlegroups.com [mailto:felton-lug at googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Robert Lewis
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 8:43 AM
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Subject: [Felton LUG] Linux loses in court case over patent dispute

This story is worrisome:

       Google found guilty of patent infringement for using Linux
       ttp://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9216070/Google_found_guilty_of_patent_infringement_for_using_Linux

A Texas company claims patent ownership over serch technology used in
several versions of the Linux kernel, and won against Google.

Red Hat  attempted to get the patent overturned in 2009.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Felton LUG" group.
To post to this group, send email to felton-lug at googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
felton-lug+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/felton-lug?hl=en.