Re: [realtime] License or not

[Erwin Rol <erwin@muffin.org>]

yodaiken@fsmlabs.com wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 10:13:45PM +0100, Erwin Rol wrote:
> > code. And i think thats the point a lot of ppl try to make. If the
> > RTLinux patent is a truely defencive patent their is no reason to
> > disallow others to use the idea, because they never
> > will beable to get a patent on it, and let you pay. But with the current
> > patent licence, it
> > looks terbily like it is meant to block out comepetition for FSM, wich
> > is entirely legal, thats
> > the number one reason to get a patent. But than just be honest about it
> > and say so. First of
> 
> I don't want to block out competition, but I have never seen a reason why we
> should give away our intellectual property to people who want to work outside
> GPL domain.
>         Work in GPL domain, you don't profit from intellectual property, and
>         the RTLinux method is royalty free.
This is somethign i apriciate very much and realize that it could have
been
very different.


> 
>         Work in the "profit from intellectual property domain" and
>         either use the RTLinux software or purchase a license to use the method.
> 
> The option:
>         Work in the  profit-from-intellectual property domain and demand free use
>         of other people's intellectual property as a basic right
This is comes down to agreeing with software patents or not. I don't
agree
with them and so i don't agree with what you sugest here. And i think we
can fight
over this (also outside the context of RTLinux) for ever. 


> 
> strikes me as the kind of argument a 6 year old would use.
I doubt a 6 year old knows what intellectual property is, and i asume
that remark
wasn't ment personaly.


> 
> > all i doubt it will help, because when IBM or MS want to use it they
> > will just open their patent
> > box and slap a number of patents around your ears they you don't even
> > know about but that you are
> > breaking, until a deal that they can use your patent and you can use
> > theirs. So the only
> > ppl you have with it are small hardworking ppl in small companies, like
> > FSM.
> 
> This argument boils down to "might makes right".
But is it so outside reality ? You see it with silly patents companies
got years back , never talked about it and just say, "pay or we sue
you". 
Only the strong survive, its not about who's right, it is about might.

> 
> >
> > For everybody in Europe just pray that we never get software patents
> > here.
> 
> I have no idea why you believe that there are no software patents in Europe. Check the
> IBM patent server under patents that reference the RTLinux patent and you will find a
> German patent on a related idea.
> I doubt you will find a open license like ours.

It believe that software patents in Europe are a bit more complex than
simply being allowed.
Maybe someone with a better background in European-Patent law could
explain it.
But as far as i know a "pure" software patent isn't allowed, but when
wrappedin the correct
legal language one can work its ways around it. But one indication that
it isn't as easy 
as in the USA, is that the number off silly patents like "one click
shopping" and "embedded scripts in HTML pages" aren't applied for here.
Just like the RSA patent wasn't valid
in Europe. And i wouldn't know why those companies would't want a patent
in a technical
market with 100 milion ppl more than the USA.
And Germany isn't the EU, when the EU decides it is a no go for software
patents the
EU countries will have to change their patent laws.

But once again , someone else with a better background probably can
explain this better.


- Erwin

> 
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> Victor Yodaiken
> Finite State Machine Labs: The RTLinux Company.
>  www.fsmlabs.com  www.rtlinux.com