On Friday, 19 August 2016 10:58:26 CEST Doug Newgard wrote: > Which is also moot. Google and RedHat both have patent portfolios that > they can and do defend. Okay, then other factors come in, Google and Redhat "actively" develop free software. This means that if they first write some software and then put a patent application for it, most often, the patent application can be invalidated through prior art. Considering patents take almost 12 to 18 months on average, the other method of contribution (patenting first and then submitting is very difficult because of continuous exposure and at least somewhat fast changes in the code base of importat FOSS). There still exists one method which is, patent first, use the technique later to contribute code, however, that would be covered with 1. clean room implementation 2. won't stand up that favorably in the court, since the company itself willingly contributed the code. So, the point that is actually the point is, a company which is "actively" contributing to the already existing FOSS software and ecosystem is a much safer company to handle than a company which dumps a bunch of free software in public periodically. This is exacerbated by the fact that they *do* use patents to pursue their agenda. -- Cheers Jayesh Badwaik
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
