Slashdot Mirror
Torvalds Says Linux IP Is Sound
An anonymous reader submits: "In an interview with CRN, Linus Torvalds says he's confident there won't be any IP problems discovered in Linux. In fact, Torvalds, says he was extra careful with issues like the IBM Read Copy Update code."
What a relief. It would really suck to have to switch back to IPX after all these years.
sulli
RTFJ.
make the TCP/IP jokes stop, please!
The Linux intellectual property is really sound, and not code? Oh great, now the RIAA are gunna bust our nuts for distributing Linux for free!
mogorific carpentry experiments
On a serious note, it is good to know he was thinking of these issues for some time.
Then if it falls in the forest does anyone hear it?
"It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
Anyway, even though this interview is really short, Linus has good points. The kernel submission system is very open, unlike propriatary systems, and if there is a problem, it can be traced.
linux when they pry it from my cold dead hands, no wait, i meant to post that on the nra site. good to see linus finally helping to clarify things
Linus seems to be getting more and more annoyed with each one of these interviews. Why don't all these various online news sites take a hint? ;) at least ask him about -something- other than SCO SCO SCO.
Give the poor man a break.
There are lives at stake here!
All I got to say is...
"..."
'Nuff said... back to some kernel hacking!
Welley Corporation - SLM Scammers
Because he's one baaaad computer hackin' mutha fucka.
Linus has never tried to go commercial with Linux. He avoids this side of things. I think this is a strength. Commercial OSs are driven by the desire to sell and as a ressult suffer technically.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
About time this came back around. I've been playing this throught my head over and over again, every time this SCO thing comes up, and finally we see the way it really works out.
See, we know SCO is like Darth Vader, and Microsoft is like the Emperor, pulling his strings. Now, we always thought IBM was Luke, kind of, in that they're the ones having to fight off Vader, but I couldn't quite figure out who Linus was. At first, I figured he was Han Solo, with the helping and the fighting and all, and Alan Cox is obviously Chewbacca (just check the hair).
But now I think we see that Linus is really a mix of Obi-Wan and Yoda, because he's helping and guiding, but not really fighting himself. At least I thought he was Yoda, just except for the lying (I mean, wtf didn't Yoda ever tell Luke SCO was his father?) but now we see Obi-Wan taking a more active role, actually standing up to SCO! So we're at the "full circle" part, where Linus tells SCO that if he strikes him down (i.e., inspects the code) he'll become more powerful (i.e. open sourced and GPL protected) than he can possibly imagine.
See, now it all makes sense! Now we just need Luke (IBM) to blow up the "Death Star" (frivilous lawsuits) with a proton torpedo (the GPL) shot down an "exhaust tube" (an exhaust tube). I hope that cleared it all up for everybody.
Consensual sex is boring.
I thought he didn't care? As in "I don't want to know what we're putting in, don't tell me"? And now he was "extra careful"? Or is this some other type of IP he's referring to?
The fact that not only Linus himself uses Linux can already be considered a success...
To succeed in the mass market, it has to be put in the market first... Something that Linus did not do!
Don't confuse Linux (the kernel) with Linux Distributions such as RedHat, Mandrake, Slackware, etc. They distro companies are the ones usually marketing Linux and facing the customers... not Linus himself.
Welley Corporation - SLM Scammers
Obviously you don't understand Linus's role in all this. Linus' customers ARE developers. Joe sixpack doesn't go download the latest kernel and install, he goes and picks up RedHat/Debian/Gentoo/Slackware/etc... from CompUSA. RedHat/Debian/Gentoo/Slackware/etc... are Linus's customers, they are the ones that deal with him
You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
1. SCO's lawsuit is about misappropriation of trade secrets
2. RCU is a patented technology
3. Patents are publicly viewable
4. Therefore, RCU cannot be a trade secret
I don't see any way SCO can have a claim unless the RCU code that IBM donated contained SysV code or code derived from SysV. I seriously doubt IBM would be stupid enough to do that.
Anyway, since trade secrets are no longer protected once they are publicly revealed, no one should have anything to worry about except possibly IBM.
but what about the TCP problems?
I am your boss at a major Fortune 500 company. You are fired.
-- everyones not everybody and neither is everybody like everyone.
When Linus says a contract dispute between IBM and SCO has no bearing on Linux, I think he's being a bit naive. If the code IBM submitted to Linux was a violation of that contract, in addition to damages IBM must pay, a court may place an injunction on shipping Linux, or force Linux users to pay damages as well, depending on the wording of the licensing agreements in the distros being used. Of course this may be pessimistic thinking, but it's not an impossible scenario. Also, if IBM is found in violation of their contract, thats ammunition to pursue further lawsuits against other Linux companies and end-users.
Vote for Pedro
If a programming project is open source, with an uncontrolled number of people working on its, whats to stop someone comming forward saying I changed module x with code/ideas I stoll form company y in an IP case.
I know things like GPL try to address IP with open source but have their been any big court cases concerning IP on open source Software to test thing out? (forgive me if I an not aware of some big case, that 99% of everyone always knows about)
The one thing SCO has mentioned has been the Read Copy Update code that IBM gave us, and that wasn't accepted for the longest time into the kernel exactly because we knew the patents were owned by IBM. [But] we said we couldn't take it until you [IBM] said very explicitly that you also license the patents.
Does this mean there is patented code in the Linux kernel? How does that not conflict with the GPL?
The worst case senario (which I think is EXTREMELY unlikely) is that the courts find SCO right on all points, this means linux will become a "dark" OS, you'll have to find obscure sites and download the latest kernel before it gets locked down.
More likely is that SCO gets chucked out on it's arse for having such lame evidence (last I heard it was 80 lines that were copied word 4 word) and linux comes out fine.
But my biggest worry is that whatever the outcome whenever a big campany is looking to migrate, the issue of the "stolen" code will come out.
Some conversation like this will happen.
IT guy: We should switch to linux it's cheaper, faster and more stable.
Manager: But what about the stolen code?
(conversation on how it wasn't stolen etc.)
The biggest problem is our reputation will be tainted and that's whats bugging me.
Give a man a fire, he is warm for a day.
Set a man on fire, he is warm for the rest of his life.
Profit motive is the worst and most inefficient way to develop any complex system. What's required is a true interest in what you do. Why do you think so many of those paper MCSEs were completely worthless? They did it because they wanted the money and didn't care about the technology. That's never going to get anyone anywhere. You do it because you love it, otherwise you find something else to do otherwise you'll always be second rate.
Un-news
Are you so naive that you actually think successful "mass market" companies "like" the consumer?
NEWS FLASH!
They don't give a F$#K either!
As long as you're still grabbing the latest and greatest, slightly modified w/ new icons version, they're happy.
They don't need to like you to succeed; they just need to have you by the balls. When was the last time someone who "liked" you asked for money, every year, to continue seeing them?
Wrong. Linus works on the Linux kernel. The people that package various distributions worry about the customers they attempt to serve. Most folks that enjoy using Linux would laugh with Linus on this one.
"...or force Linux users to pay damages as well, depending on the wording of the licensing agreements in the distros being used."
Linux users are not party to the contract between IBM and SCO, so nothing in that contract can compell Linux users to do anything.
The most the courts can do to Linux is force them to remove code IF (and I just can't see how it could, but if) SCO does in fact own the rights to code submitted to Linux by IBM. Linux will live on no matter what and SCO can't touch users or developers.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
It is built by developers...for developers.
I think that's rather unfair, but actually, this is *exactly* why I use Linux. Microsoft has always seemed to follow the philosophy of "Shut up, we know what's good for you", which is fine for most users but drives me up the fucking wall. I spent months learning to use Linux, but I can now finally set my computer up exactly the way I want it which I never could with Windows.
This is the main reason I like the open-source movement, not the philosophy or supposed superiority of the code.
no, it's about (alegedly) violating an agreement. It has nothing to do with who owns what, but rather "you said you wouldn't do this, and then you did it".
Not that that's much more likely than any of the other hot (or body temp) air (or some gas) that SCO has been expelling, but the nature of the complaints (so far) filed are such that the can have no effect on anyone other than IBM; McBride's wet dreams not withstanding.
Linus :
Curious mathematical idea, but lovely rhetoric.
cat /boot/vmlinuz* > /dev/audio
"Proudly Posting Without Reading The Article"
That is not ignorance of the law, that is ignorance of the fact.
Not knowing that something is illegal is not an excuse.
Not knowing you DID something in the first place is a totally different matter.
Linus is not ignorant of the law, he knows taking someone elses stuff and putting it in his kernel without permission is illegal. The point is that, if you have no reason to suspect you don't have the rights, that should be the end of it as far as you are concerned, until someone points out otherwise.
To do things the other way would be incredibly expensive, and endless... how do you prove code is totally within your rights? Full patent search and public annoncement on each function and update?
The only thing that shows up being even close between the Linux kernel and the versions of Unix with source available is what seems to be a derivative of malloc and mfree in ate_utils.c
ate_utils is/was part of the NUMA code for IA64. It has been removed from the latest development and prepatch kernels (it's obsolete, from what I've read.)
There are some less interesting similarities between the signal handling code, but that's hardly remarkable. How many ways can you write a switch statement?
The key thing to remember though is that SCO doesn't actually claim they wrote the code. They claim to own rights in code that IBM wrote. I would bet that it's safe to assume that a detailed inspection of AIX and Linux 2.4.21 will reveal similarities. The question is, does IBM have the right to relicense code they created?
When was the last time someone who "liked" you asked for money, every year, to continue seeing them?
:(
I knew something was wrong when my girlfriend asked if I could do direct deposit.
How many times does RMS have to tell you. IT'S GNU/linux.
Please, please, please can we avoid using the acronym IP? It is not at all a valid concept - these are all completely disparate areas of law and should never be referred to in the same breath without clarification.
It is often used as a term that encompasses patents, trademarks and copyright - but if you ever hire an "IP lawyer"(sic) you will nearly invariably find that they only specialise in one or two of the above areas.
Q.
Insert Signature Here
Setting your computer up exactly the way you want *is* the philosophy. Read the GNU Manifesto. RMS started GNU precisely for the same reason you prefer Linux over Windows.
I don't think that a more expansive definition of derivitive works "helps" the GPL. If anything, it contributes to the perception that GPL has a "viral nature" as claimed by Microsoft. If I am a company with commercial interests and I also want to make use of GPL software, I want to be very clear about what constitutes a derivative work so that my commercial interests are not affected. If something that I do using GPL software is not currently considered a derivative work, and then suddenly someone like SCO comes along, wins a suit, and expands the definition of a derivative work to include the type of work I am doing, then my commercial interests can be severely impacted. That is why SCO CANNOT win this case if we ever want to see widespread use of GPL software by the business community.
Xix.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
In fact, a lawyer actually commented on a case won by Abraham Lincoln in which evidence of (I believe) the Nautical Almanac that the night in question was moonless, that the evidence should not have been accepted and that the defense should have summoned an astronomer who could have been cross-examined by the prosecution. Lawyers fundamentally do not understand scientific method (several in my immediate family.)
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
What Linus was saying about patents was that he will not actively go and search out patents to see if a development is infringing. This is considered the proper practice for engineers as it would eliminate any possible clean-room development defense if they looked at the patents, AND (to make matters worse) patents are so horribly written that you may not even recognize an infringing item.
As for the RCU, he was extra careful because it was a known fact that IBM had a patent related to the code in question. So, he was being careful to make IBM formally license the patent before including the code.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.