Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 21 Dec 2003 14:40:40 -0500 | Subject | Re: [OT] use of patented algorithms in the kernel ok or not? | From | Lennert Buytenhek <> |
| |
On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 05:25:04PM -0800, jw schultz wrote:
> > What am I to do? Ignore the patent? Or should I refrain from submitting > > the patch I wrote, and look for an unencumbered algorithm instead? > > This whole thing seems strange to me. > > Why do you even know the algorithm is patented? And if you > knew it was, why implement it? If you implemented it and > then did a search you poisoned yourself.
I implemented the algorithm, and before submitting it, I asked the authors of the paper I used to implement the algorithm what the patent status of this algorithm is. The paper doesn't say anything about any patents (in retrospect, obviously it wouldn't.)
> I've not poked around in the routing code but it seems to me > that the kernel would need a longest-prefix match algorithm > already so you shouldn't have to look far for one.
There is one already, and it's suboptimal, to say it mildly.
> As for asking the patent holder for a license. If the > patent were owned by a network hardware company i cannot see > them licensing it because the speed of their equipment is > their competitive advantage. But you indicated the the > patent is not owned by the HW company but exclusively > licensed. An existing exclusive license would preclude > FLOSS being granted a license and a gratis sublicense would > likely violate the existing license.
I asked this question on l-k because there seem to be many 'common' techniques in wide use which have US patents covering them.
Considering the circumstances, yes, licensing is probably out of the question.
> It would be completely OT to wonder at what point source > code crossed the line of expressing information of public > record into being a patent violation. <niggle>
I wouldn't be surprised if publishing source code implementing a patented algorithm would itself be considered as a patent violation (I'm not saying that it would make sense to me though.)
I think this l-k thread was sufficiently instructive for me to decide that I won't be publishing my implementation of this algorithm, and I'll just wait until another (free) LPM algorithm pops up.
--L - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |