Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Software filter engines for high end audio and now DSP's
From: Paul Barton-Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net)
Date: to helmi 17 2000 - 09:52:21 EST
>only code, it's the ideas behind the code. I don't believe the GPL is the
>only true license, and it's very unfortunate that this happened. But the
>blame is mainly with the patoff.
true. but part of the reason why the GPL is important here is that it
forces reimplementation of an idea without creating patent-like
protection. If RTLinux was under a BSD license, anyone could make a
proprietary product with it *without doing any work* to implement what
Victor and Co. have done. Victor doesn't feel like having his work
used in this way (and neither do I).
however, as you note, he has also patented the idea, which definitely
goes a step further. part of me is happy that it sends a large warning
message to proprietary software developers that we are not going to
roll over and play dead while they lock down the house. a larger part
of me is sad that he has done something i consider an anathema - he
has made it impossible for anyone to use an idea without his
permission.
>I should add that he has said he is prepared to discuss the matter for other
>DFSG-compliant licenses. I don't know patent law, but can he control who can
>used the patented technique, regardless of license agreements? If he says
>yes to a RT-BSD, and someone makes a proprietary product based on it (which
>is OK according to the license) can he just say no?
i don't know patent law either, but i will just note the audio
connection here: there is a patent on fm synthesis. yet there are a
number of open source implementations of it. some of them come with
licenses that would permit a proprietary product to use them (e.g
parts of Csound that are not under the MIT license). what does that
mean ? IANAL, but my guess is that if the patent holder (is it
stanford or yamaha, i can never remember) decided to go after such a
thing, they would win because its still infringment. Moreover, based
on my conversation with my friend who *is* a lawyer, the writers of
the said code would be liable for contributory infringement.
But all this is beside the point - the first challenge to Victor's
patent will bring it down because of the VM/CMS precedent. I think.
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : pe maalis 10 2000 - 07:23:27 EST