Обсуждение: US Patents vs Non-US software ...
Just curious here, but are patents global? PostgreSQL is not US software, but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through, only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow transcend international borders? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
It varies from country to country. Here are some relevant links. http://swpat.ffii.org/ http://www.researchoninnovation.org/online.htm http://www.abul.org/brevets/articles/tsuba_refs.php3?langnew=en -----Original Message----- From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Marc G. Fournier Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 3:32 PM To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: [HACKERS] US Patents vs Non-US software ... Just curious here, but are patents global? PostgreSQL is not US software, but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through, only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow transcend international borders? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:31:48PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > Just curious here, but are patents global? PostgreSQL is not US software, > but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through, > only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow > transcend international borders? No, they are limited to the territory they are registered in. Not sure how that applies to somebody who just uses Postgres in the US; of course, IANAL. -- Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[@]dcc.uchile.cl>) www.google.com: interfaz de línea de comando para la web.
--- Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl> escribió: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:31:48PM -0400, Marc G. > Fournier wrote: > > > Just curious here, but are patents global? > PostgreSQL is not US software, > > but it is run within the US ... so, would this > patent, if it goes through, > > only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or > do patents somehow > > transcend international borders? > > No, they are limited to the territory they are > registered in. > It depends. Every country is independant so their laws are independants but if they sign a covenant in that way or if there are any commercial covenants to force with, countries like US can do their will. But i think like Tom's. There is nothing to worry about there are no penalty for violate a non-existing patent. And when (if) the patent become a reality i'm sure the core (you geniuses of programming) have been eliminated that algorithm. regards, Jaime Casanova _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Información de Estados Unidos y América Latina, en Yahoo! Noticias. Visítanos en http://noticias.espanol.yahoo.com
Greetings, Patents do not transcend international border. They need to be applied for in each country separately. To ease the process of applying for patents in many countries at once Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) was formed. When you file a patent application with WIPO head office under PCT you specify a list "countries of designation" from list of countries members of PCT. Filing like this takes significantly less in paperwork and application fees than filing application in each country separately. Many countries do not grant software patents so it is not likely that IBM applied through PCT since a refusal in one country may cause to patent to be refused in all countries. Hope it helps, Nicolai Tufar
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 09:22:58AM +0200, Nicolai Tufar wrote: > Greetings, > > Patents do not transcend international border. They need > to be applied for in each country separately. > > To ease the process of applying for patents in many countries > at once Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) was formed. When you It's also true that many countried have bilateral treatings respecting the "intellectual property" in the other country. Canada has such with the US, as far as I know, so that it is possible to request injunctive relief in Canada for violation of a patent which is grated by the USPTO. The relief is limited, however, and requires certain hoop-jumping which is sort of tiresome. Unless, of course, you have a large, full time legal staff and you're already a multinational. A -- Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca The plural of anecdote is not data. --Roger Brinner
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:22:58 +0200 >Many countries do not grant software patents so it is not >likely >that IBM applied through PCT since a refusal in one >country may >cause to patent to be refused in all countries. Contrary to popular misconception, virtually all countries grant software patents. The problem is that people have applied the term "software patent" to USPTO-specific lameness like "one-click shopping", which really is outside the scope of traditional software patents. While most countries do not grant patents for this flavor of frivolousness, they do grant hard-theory algorithm design patents across virtually all types of machinery (including virtual machinery). Traditional software design patents are structurally and functionally indistinguishable from chemical process patents, which are generally recognized as valid in most countries. Software patents have to have novelty that survives reduction to general process design (and the ARC algorithm looks like it qualifies) if you want most countries to grant it. The problem with USPTO and so-called "software patents" is that they allow people to patent what is essentially prior art with re-named variables. Chemical process patents are a good analogy because literally every argument used against "software patents" could be used against chemical process patents, which no one apparently finds controversial. What often passes for material "novel-ness" in software processes with the USPTO would never fly for chemical processes with the same USPTO. If someone invents a better pipe alloy for carrying chemical fluids, you cannot re-patent all chemical processes with the novelty being that you use a better type of pipe -- that change is not material to the chemical process, even if it improves the economics of it in some fashion. The only thing patentable would be the superior alloy design in the abstract. Most of the lame "software patents" are lame because reduction to machine process design gives you something that is decidedly non-novel. In other words, the "novel-ness" is the semantic dressing-up of a non-novel engineering process. cheers, j. andrew rogers
Ühel kenal päeval (esmaspäev, 17. jaanuar 2005, 21:45-0300), kirjutas Alvaro Herrera: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:31:48PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > Just curious here, but are patents global? PostgreSQL is not US software, > > but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through, > > only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow > > transcend international borders? > > No, they are limited to the territory they are registered in. > > Not sure how that applies to somebody who just uses Postgres in the US; > of course, IANAL. USAmericans can just place their servers somewhere not under US jurisdiction (Cuba) or even better, in legal vacuum (Quantanamo) and run client over internet. If something infringes then it surely is the server, not the client. -- Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 11:38:45AM -0800, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:22:58 +0200 > >Many countries do not grant software patents so it is not > >likely > >that IBM applied through PCT since a refusal in one > >country may > >cause to patent to be refused in all countries. > > > Contrary to popular misconception, virtually all countries > grant software patents. The problem is that people have Thanks to the new European Union member Poland, the Dutch plan to put the software patents on the agenda 3 days before Christmas was revoked. So no software patents in Europe for now. (and the opposition against it seems to grow!) -- __________________________________________________ "Nothing is as subjective as reality" Reinoud van Leeuwen reinoud.v@n.leeuwen.net http://www.xs4all.nl/~reinoud __________________________________________________
Hannu Krosing wrote: > ?hel kenal p?eval (esmasp?ev, 17. jaanuar 2005, 21:45-0300), kirjutas > Alvaro Herrera: > > On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:31:48PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > > > Just curious here, but are patents global? PostgreSQL is not US software, > > > but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through, > > > only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow > > > transcend international borders? > > > > No, they are limited to the territory they are registered in. > > > > Not sure how that applies to somebody who just uses Postgres in the US; > > of course, IANAL. > > USAmericans can just place their servers somewhere not under US > jurisdiction (Cuba) or even better, in legal vacuum (Quantanamo) and run > client over internet. > > If something infringes then it surely is the server, not the client. Yes, our development group itself is perhaps OK, but that doesn't help US companies using it, nor US companies packaging/distributing commerical versions of PostgreSQL. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:05:57 +0100, Reinoud van Leeuwen <reinoud.v@n.leeuwen.net> wrote: > > Contrary to popular misconception, virtually all countries > > grant software patents. The problem is that people have > > Thanks to the new European Union member Poland, the Dutch plan to put the > software patents on the agenda 3 days before Christmas was revoked. So no > software patents in Europe for now. (and the opposition against it seems > to grow!) Since Poland's name has been called, Poland is a sample of a Eurpean country which does not grant software/algorithm/etc patents neither directly nor in form of 'technological method' (our patent office is well, very conservative institution :)). As for the EU voting, it was the first time I was really glad that Poland entered Union. Both ways. First that way that powers like USA cannot force their way with patents on Poland, second that Poland give positive input into EU. Ahhh, politics, enough of it. Let's end this thread. ;) Regards, Dawid