Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Why Consider Linux Kernel Patent Risks?

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the something-to-think-about dept.

chromatic writes "After the hoopla about OSRM's study of patent risks in the Linux kernel, I talked to Dan Ravicher, the patent attorney and free software afficionado who conducted the study. Contrary to my initial reaction, I've come to believe that the study is actually very valuable. Linux and Patent Risks on the O'Reilly Network explains why."

3 of 226 comments (clear)

  1. Has anyone audited non-free OS's for patents? by ron_ivi · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I would still like to know if anyone's audited the source code for any of the proprietary OS's for patent violations.

    Seems Linux will be one of the safest kernels from a (patent point of view) to run, since it has had the most companies scouring it's source code looking for infringements.

  2. It's a MAD World!!! by grunt107 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With the gloom of the patent infringement reports, the one bright spot is the Patent machines of IBM (and HP). It is doubtful that other major patent holders (MS) do not violate any of IBM/HP (and vice versa), so the threat of mutually assure destruction is the only seeming deterrent.

    Who are the commies in this scenario?

  3. Re:So.... by sloanster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If somebody decides to sue Linux for copyright infringement, who defends it?

    I think you are a little confused, perhaps... When you say someone will "sue linux", exactly who do you mean is being sued? Novell? Linus Torvalds? IBM? Red Hat?

    Once you apply a bit of clear thinking, and decide who is being sued, the answer to your question will follow naturally.