Re: [OT] use of patented algorithms in the kernel ok or not?

[Stan Bubrouski <stan@ccs.neu.edu>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1555 bytes --]

On Sun, 2003-12-21 at 14:55, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
> The question is "What toes are OK to step onto".
> 

I totally understand this.  To a point.

> e.g.
> To the best of my knowledge it should be illegal to distribute 2.6
> kernel in France because AFAIK it is illegal to use encryption there.
> (If not France, there are other countries that fit)

True, but that has always been the case.

> (And you remember that this same problem was only resolved a few years
> ago for the U.S.! Otherwise the crypto-stuff would have been in kernel
> for years!)
> 

This really isn't a crypto question though, and this has financial
ramifications here as well.  Violating a French law isn't as scary to me
as having to hire a patent lawyer here in the US...

> So the only question is "Is it OK to step on the U.S. toe?".
> I guess there are other countries on this small planet (>200 IIRC) where
> the current linux kernel has it's "problems(tm)" here and there.
> 

Hey I'm all for allowing the use of patented algorithms in the kernel,
but I think they should be separate trees or patches that can be applied
and hosted elsewhere, the same way crypto was afor a long time.  I think
the idea should be to step on as few toes as possible, not knowingly do
it because it can be done...that's all.  You have to remember, patents
here are frightening, and you damned well better have a lot of money if
you are going to need a patent lawyer, that is a commodity most of us
can't afford.

-sb

> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bis denn

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]