Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: >> I work for a risk-averse company, and I want to compile a solid case for >> obtaining and using Python at work. >> > Given the nature of the US Patent Office... You might as well lock > the doors now... > > The Patent Office could issue a patent next week that makes all > bytecode interpreted languages subject to some royalty...
Risk isn't just what could happen, it's how likely it is and what effects it would have. A patent affecting millions of installed interpreters is pretty unlikely and would have many challengers. Even if it were upheld, how many larger companies with deeper pockets would they go after before his? And everyone stuck in the same boat would quickly work towards a non-infringing solution. Cases like MS-EOLAS and RIM-NTP aren't exactly a daily occurence. They also demonstrate why there really is safety in numbers. Plus all the potential negatives have to weighed against the increased productivity his company gains from using a scripting language. The gains may more than offset any potential patent settlement. Risk-averse doesn't mean head-in-the-sand. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
