On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 02:58:33PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ahead and release with it anyway. IBM would justifiably jump on us
> > for that as a result.
>
> With what? They have no patent, yet, and may never have one. If the
> patent were already issued then I'd be much more concerned.
With a team of lawyers which we can't match. They may never have a
patent, or they may get it next month. I'd feel more
comfortable if I knew what sort of remedies they could demand (I have
a call open to a lawyer I believe will give me a conservative answer
about that).
What I can say, for sure, is that no responsible corporate user will
be able to use this code with the threat hanging over. The recent
SCO stuff ought to be a lesson here: their claims appear to have been
completely baseless, but companies still spent a pile of time and
money on the issue. It'll be far worse in a case where the
infringment is real and, yet worse, intentional.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
When my information changes, I alter my conclusions. What do you do sir?
--attr. John Maynard Keynes
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
