Hi Andrew/Hannes,
Esh, Andrew writes:
> On the other hand, releasing information about patented material does not
> invalidate the patent. In fact, the opposite is exactly what the patent
As I have said in my earlier responses, GPL does contain text that makes
lawyers very nervous about the ability to enforce patents. You're right that
releasing information about patents doesn't invalidate the patent. At the IETF,
we see companies typically release proprietary information in an attempt to
standardize it. But in that case, there is no language (as in GPL) that
makes lawyers uncomfortable. If lawyers are uncomfortable, we engineers don't
get to release stuff back into public domain.
> We should also consider that a decoder is not an implementation or use of
> the patented idea, just an illustration or expression. Being able to decode
> the protocol does not mean any value is being derived from it.
It does not matter what we consider. It is the lawyers engaged in IPR issues
that interpret the licenses and decide what it says about patent infringement.
But, if we make the change that I'm suggesting and companies then release
decoders for proprietary protocols, I think the user community of Ethereal
benefits a lot. It also frees companies from worrying about patent issues and
can then release source code for the decoders as well under a different license
such as IBM's or Mozilla's.
Dinesh
--
Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Willing is not enough; we must do.
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe