Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Tridgell Recommends Reading Software Patents

Posted by timothy on from the you-may-read-the-article dept.

H4x0r Jim Duggan writes "Andrew Tridgell rejected the common fears about triple damages: 'If you've got one lot of damages for patent infringement, what would happen to the project? It's dead. If it gets three lots of damages for patent infringement, what happens to the project? It's still dead.' Tridge then explains the right way to read a patent and build a legal defense: 'That first type of defence is really the one you want, it's called: non-infringement. And that is: "we don't do that. The patent says X, we don't do X, therefore go away, sue someone else, it's not relevant for us." That's the defence you want. [...] Next one, prior art: [...] Basically the argument is: somebody else did that before. It's a very, very tricky argument to get right. Extremely tricky, and it is the most common argument bandied about in the free software community. And if you see it in the primary defence against a patent, you should cringe because it is an extremely unsafe way of doing things.' There are even some tips in the talk specifically for Slashdotters."

8 of 173 comments (clear)

  1. Here's a better idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When I'm writing code, I don't have to worry about patent infringement, because the stuff isn't patentable. That way I can write code just like you write anything else; without looking over your shoulder.

    1. Re:Here's a better idea by Improv · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In the meantime, we can keep spreading the ideas of IP abolitionism, encouraging people to ignore it when they can get away with it and to push for legal change. A movement is important when fighting such established interests - buying or convincing one politician won't really do (and isn't really doable on this issue)

      --
      For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
    2. Re:Here's a better idea by renoX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > As nice as the world might be if food was free and software had no patents, that isn't the world we live in.

      Remember that software patents are basically non-existant in Europe..
      Growing food is labor intensive, so it cannot be truly free(*), software patents are only a self-inflicted wound.

      *: unless you can convince people to give their work for free, _someone_ has to pay for the tools and the labor used to grow food.

  2. Re:There is always another patent. by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Many patents are there not for suing the ass off the competition but to protect yourself from getting attacked.

    Which only became a problem with the invention of patents in the first place and keeps getting worse.

    http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/againstnew.htm

  3. Re:Stupid System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because it is as close as anyone is going to get as far as logical watertightness goes. Let P be "You are using a patented idea" and Q be "It's been done before". Enforcing a patent requires P.

    Patent owner: "P is true of you." (Initial threat)
    You: In fact Not-P is true of us.
    Patent owner: OK, Not-P so we can't enforce patent.

    vs

    Patent owner: "P is true of you."
    You: P is true but Q is true also. (You try to stop legal wrangling with Q.)
    Patent owner: OK, P so we can try to enforce patent, regardless of Q. We'll try to show Not-Q.

  4. Re:There is always another patent. by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Many patents are there not for suing the ass off the competition but to protect yourself from getting attacked.

    And since free software competing with yours is definitely an attack, why not attack? The very idea of patents, after all, is to encourage people to share their inventions by protecting them from competition in turn. That failed miserably, but can't be helped anymore, there's too many financial interests milking the current system for all its worth.

    Anyway, the real defence is moving to a (software patent) free country.

    --

    Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  5. Hidden costs by pablodiazgutierrez · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The cost of searching for patents whenever you're doing something, anything, really, is a huge burden on any R&D department. By forbidding employees to look at patents, companies make then focus on the important stuff: making things.

    --

    To do list for Windows
  6. Re:There is always another patent. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Every time an open source project gets sued, we need to find a workaround for the patent, and publicize it loudly, so anyone can use that workaround. The great thing is, after that, the suer would no longer be able to collect royalties from anyone for that patent, because they will just use the workaround.

    Yeah, because that worked out so nice and easy with PNG vs GIF, didn't it?