Bruce-san, Tom-san, thank you for your explanation.
I understood how they avoided the situation.
We have to except patent algorithm or code like other contributing companies in PostgreSQL community.
Is that correct?
If that's yes, we can keep PostgreSQL policy.
If that's no, I might have misunderstanding, please let me know.
Best Regards,
Mototaka Kanematsu
Bruce Momjian wrote on 2018/04/06 3:48:
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 02:47:54PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
>>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 10:54:09AM +0900, Mototaka Kanematsu wrote:
>>>> On 2018-04-04 06:44, Mototaka Kanematsu wrote:
>>>>> In private judgment, I don't enforce a patent right for PostgreSQL.
>>
>>>> I mean if our code includes our patent, there are no-charge, royalty-free in that.
>>
>>> Yes, you are right that companies that have patents are contributing to
>>> Postgres. We ask that people contributing to Postgres not study any
>>> patented material so we are less likely to have a patent problem.
>>
>> Also, just to make our position clear: we do not accept code into
>> Postgres if there are known patents bearing on it. An offer of a
>> license is not going to change that, regardless of terms.
>
> +1
>
