>If you want to poke around for 2 hours, I bet you wil find more patent
>infringements. And not looking doesn't protect you from patent
>violations. What is the point of removing this one. Just because Neil
>did some legwork. Anyone could do some legwork and find some in any
>software, I bet.
>
>
Well from one perspective... Digging for patent infringement
is expensive just look at the SCO suit. However, this is a
public list.
We have just admitted that we knowingly may infringe upon
an IBM patent. That really is a different thing than,
"We have some really smart people that came up with something,
"like" this other technology".
The reality I would bet is that IBM could give a flying roosters
butt whether or not PostgreSQL infringes on their patents. However
they will care very much, if Fujitsu or SRA does and we (the
community) may have insured that.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com
PostgreSQL Replicator -- production quality replication for PostgreSQL
