On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote: > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > > I beleive this method is patented by somebody, [snip] > > has someone a pointer?
Here's some stuff from my mail archives - I haven't checked whether the links still work. The following one probably doesn't, but looks like the patent number is 6167407: http://164.195.100.11/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1='6167407'.WKU.&OS=PN/6167407&RS=PN/6167407 Cheers, Richard -- __ _ |_) /| Richard Atterer | CS student at the Technische | GnuPG key: | \/¯| http://atterer.net | Universität München, Germany | 0x888354F7 ¯ '` ¯ ----- Forwarded message from Clifford Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----- Date: 29 Jan 2001 10:05:11 +1100 From: "Clifford Heath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Goswin Brederlow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: reverse checksumming [legal] > What came first, rsync or the patent? OSA refers to its issued patent US6006034 as the "SmartPull" patent. This isn't the patent that threatens rsync, though it might be relevant to some of the preceeding discussion. I haven't considered whether there's any overlap with rsync itself - in any case I doubt OSA would attempt to block use of rsync. We think that rsync is wonderful! The patent that may overlap with rsync is US5446888 and its followup number US5721907, with precedence date Jan 14 1994. I am not a lawyer, but it seems to directly conflict with rsync. I've had correspondence with the rights holders, as OSA wished to implement something similar in a product but held off until licensing concerns were addressed. They are Travelling Software Inc. (TSI), and refer to the technology as "SpeedSync", using it in their LapLink product line. At the time of my last contact (August 1999), Travelling Software had "not made a determination if rsync infringes on any intellectual property right of TSI or not." Read the patent and decide for yourself. I'm not qualified to hold a legal opinion. The patent clearly identifies which operations are performed on the host sending the file, and which on the host receiving it. We discovered a method which reversed many of the operations with substantial benefit (as Tim Adam has told you), and filed a patent to this effect, with a defensive intent. This latest patent has not issued (it's "pending"). So we have no rights (yet!) to ask you to cease and desist from implementing and using it. Be aware that this might change in the future. I personally believe (and think OSA agrees) that it would be counter-productive to the industry as a whole, but it's not my decision. Who knows, OSA itself might be sold to some sharks who think differently... > This is just the rsync algorithm and thats probably way older than the > patent, so the patent might not hold. I don't believe that rsync is older, but in any case it's difficult and expensive to challenge an issued patent over prior art, and I don't think that Tridge is likely to do that. If you fear a suit from TSI and would choose a "prior art" defense, you will need Tridge's help, as only he could establish priority. > Can the text of the Patent be found anywhere online? <http://www.delphion.com/details?&pn=US05721907__> -- Clifford Heath, Open Software Associates, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Ph +613 9895 2194, Fax 9895 2020, <http://www.osa.com.au/~cjh>, 56-60 Rutland Rd, Box Hill 3128, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. ----- End forwarded message ----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
