On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:37:56PM -0500, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> Hmm, let's see:
>
> Assignee: Digital Equipment Corporation (Maynard, MA)
> Appl. No.: 646734
> Filed: May 3, 1996
>
> Versus:
>
> * Derived from hp300 version by Mike Hibler, this version by William
>
Quoth Poul-Henning Kamp on Wed, Jun 13, 2001:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jordan Hubbard writes:
> >From: Bill Vermillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> We just need to hide all the code from the lawyers.
> >
> >Why? They wouldn't understand it anyway. What we really need to do
> >is stop HIRING
Today Jordan Hubbard wrote:
> From: Bill Vermillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Patented algorithm in FreeBSD
> Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 09:45:46 -0400
>
> > We just need to hide all the code from the lawyers.
>
> Why? They wouldn't understand it anyw
Hello ,
Wednesday, June 13, 2001, 7:35:09 PM, you wrote:
is there a real problem in the US because of patented algos in
FreeBSD?
I think its a very bad situation for the US people, a big company can
patent a lot of routines to stop other projects like freebsd, or not?
I hope to get some intere
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jordan Hubbard writes:
>From: Bill Vermillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Patented algorithm in FreeBSD
>Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 09:45:46 -0400
>
>> We just need to hide all the code from the lawyers.
>
>Why? They wou
From: Bill Vermillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Patented algorithm in FreeBSD
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 09:45:46 -0400
> We just need to hide all the code from the lawyers.
Why? They wouldn't understand it anyway. What we really need to do
is stop HIRING them. :)
- Jordan
Patents don't always require licensing. Ever Unix system extant
has a patented piece in it [or perhaps HAD is more appropriate]
as the patents had expired.
I saw the copy of it years ago and I looked for it recently but
can't figure out where it is.
The permissions - the old -rwx- etc we are so
> : Well, the application date is what counts, and that's mar1992, but I'm
> : pretty sure that Bill Jolitz had them beat to that date already...
>
> I'm pretty sure that VMS 3.x used a similar technique. I have my old
> VMS internals docs from that time frame (maybe they are from 4.x).
> We're
In a message dated 06/11/2001 7:02:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> So, you are very safe in using this technique, for a variety of reasons:
>
> - The patent is almost certainly invalid, and proving this in court
> would be straightforward.
> - Compaq (owner of
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Jordan Hubbard writes:
: The patent system is broken and we need to focus our energies on
: reforming it, not on trying to bend ourselves into impossible shapes
: to conform to the damage it's done.
Exactly. My thoughts are to hell with them. The patent sighted is
In message <30671.992330850@critter> Poul-Henning Kamp writes:
: Well, the application date is what counts, and that's mar1992, but I'm
: pretty sure that Bill Jolitz had them beat to that date already...
I'm pretty sure that VMS 3.x used a similar technique. I have my old
VMS internals docs fro
This whole thread is kind of silly. Don't people realize the sheer
number of "patent infringments" there are in FreeBSD (or, indeed,
Linux?) Sure, you could add a flag to turn each and every instance of
such patent infringment off but the end-result would be something that
didn't even resemble a
> The key thing with patents is that they are meaningless until the
> patent holder decides to protect them in court by challenging the
> people who are supposedly in violation of the patent. If a patent
> holder decides to go after you, it can be costly even if you win.
They can
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Smith writes:
>> Hi
>>
>> Go to http://www.uspto.gov/patft/, search for patent number 5873127, and
>> you will find the description of mapping page table entries into virtual
>> memory via one page directory entry pointing to the page directory itself
>> - exa
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 04:27:12PM -0700, Matt Dillon wrote:
>
> You need to get two. Start with both pointing at the same point,
> let the cat follow it around a bit, then split them into two different
> dots going opposite directions.
>
> If you have two cats get one followin
:
:Mike Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:> Every time I tease my housemate's cat with a laser pointer, I am
:> violating a US patent. (No, really.)
:
:I need to get a laser pointer...
:
:DES
:--
:Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You need to get two. Start with both pointing at t
Mike Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Every time I tease my housemate's cat with a laser pointer, I am
> violating a US patent. (No, really.)
I need to get a laser pointer...
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe fr
:> So it looks like we have prior art by around 6 years, which would
:> invalidate the patent iff it was the same thing.
:
:Does it mean that the algorithm is free to use by everyone or free to use
:only in freebsd? I would like to implemet these page table back pointers
:too and I'm scared by th
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 12:53:33AM +0200, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > So it looks like we have prior art by around 6 years, which would
> > invalidate the patent iff it was the same thing.
>
> Does it mean that the algorithm is free to use by everyone or free to use
> only in freebsd? I would like
:> So it looks like we have prior art by around 6 years, which would
:> invalidate the patent iff it was the same thing.
:
:Does it mean that the algorithm is free to use by everyone or free to use
:only in freebsd? I would like to implemet these page table back pointers
:too and I'm scared by th
> > So it looks like we have prior art by around 6 years, which would
> > invalidate the patent iff it was the same thing.
>
> Does it mean that the algorithm is free to use by everyone or free to use
> only in freebsd? I would like to implemet these page table back pointers
> too and I'm scared
> hahahahahahaaThe patent was filed in 1996. In the 90's the patent
> office starting granting patents for everything under the sun without
> doing real prior art searches. I'm sure even just going to the candy
> store these days is patented by someone...
Every time I tease
:Hmm, let's see:
:
: Assignee: Digital Equipment Corporation (Maynard, MA)
: Appl. No.: 646734
: Filed: May 3, 1996
:
:Versus:
:
: * Derived from hp300 version by Mike Hibler, this version by William
: * Jolitz uses a recursive map [a pde points to the page directory] to
> So it looks like we have prior art by around 6 years, which would
> invalidate the patent iff it was the same thing.
Does it mean that the algorithm is free to use by everyone or free to use
only in freebsd? I would like to implemet these page table back pointers
too and I'm scared by the paten
:Hi
:
:Go to http://www.uspto.gov/patft/, search for patent number 5873127, and
:you will find the description of mapping page table entries into virtual
:memory via one page directory entry pointing to the page directory itself
:- exactly what FreeBSD does with PTDPTDI and APTDPTDI entries on i3
In article
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
you write:
>Hi
>
>Go to http://www.uspto.gov/patft/, search for patent number 5873127, and
>you will find the description of mapping page table entries into virtual
>memory via one page directory entry pointing to the page directory itself
>- exactly what FreeBSD do
> Hi
>
> Go to http://www.uspto.gov/patft/, search for patent number 5873127, and
> you will find the description of mapping page table entries into virtual
> memory via one page directory entry pointing to the page directory itself
> - exactly what FreeBSD does with PTDPTDI and APTDPTDI entries
Hi
Go to http://www.uspto.gov/patft/, search for patent number 5873127, and
you will find the description of mapping page table entries into virtual
memory via one page directory entry pointing to the page directory itself
- exactly what FreeBSD does with PTDPTDI and APTDPTDI entries on i386.
(in
28 matches
Mail list logo