Thread: US Patents vs Non-US software ...

US Patents vs Non-US software ...

From
"Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Just curious here, but are patents global?  PostgreSQL is not US software, 
but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through, 
only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow 
transcend international borders?

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664


Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...

From
"Dann Corbit"
Date:
It varies from country to country.  Here are some relevant links.

http://swpat.ffii.org/

http://www.researchoninnovation.org/online.htm

http://www.abul.org/brevets/articles/tsuba_refs.php3?langnew=en

-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Marc G.
Fournier
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 3:32 PM
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: [HACKERS] US Patents vs Non-US software ...


Just curious here, but are patents global?  PostgreSQL is not US
software,
but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes
through,
only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow
transcend international borders?

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services
(http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ:
7615664

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...

From
Alvaro Herrera
Date:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:31:48PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:

> Just curious here, but are patents global?  PostgreSQL is not US software, 
> but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through, 
> only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow 
> transcend international borders?

No, they are limited to the territory they are registered in.

Not sure how that applies to somebody who just uses Postgres in the US;
of course, IANAL.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[@]dcc.uchile.cl>)
www.google.com: interfaz de línea de comando para la web.


Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...

From
Jaime Casanova
Date:
 --- Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl> escribió:

> On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:31:48PM -0400, Marc G.
> Fournier wrote:
> 
> > Just curious here, but are patents global? 
> PostgreSQL is not US software, 
> > but it is run within the US ... so, would this
> patent, if it goes through, 
> > only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or
> do patents somehow 
> > transcend international borders?
> 
> No, they are limited to the territory they are
> registered in.
> 
It depends. Every country is independant so their laws
are independants but if they sign a covenant in that
way or if there are any commercial covenants to force
with, countries like US can do their will.

But i think like Tom's. There is nothing to worry
about there are no penalty for violate a non-existing
patent. 
And when (if) the patent become a reality i'm sure the
core (you geniuses of programming) have been
eliminated that algorithm.

regards,
Jaime Casanova

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Información de Estados Unidos y América Latina, en Yahoo! Noticias.
Visítanos en http://noticias.espanol.yahoo.com


Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...

From
Nicolai Tufar
Date:
Greetings,

Patents do not transcend international border. They need
to be applied for in each country separately.

To ease  the process of applying for patents in many countries
at once Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) was formed. When you
file a patent application with WIPO head office under PCT you
specify a list "countries of designation" from list of countries
members of PCT. Filing like this takes significantly less in
paperwork and application fees than filing application in each
country separately.

Many countries do not grant software patents so it is not likely
that IBM applied through PCT since a refusal in one country may
cause to patent to be refused in all countries.

Hope it helps,
Nicolai Tufar


Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...

From
Andrew Sullivan
Date:
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 09:22:58AM +0200, Nicolai Tufar wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> Patents do not transcend international border. They need
> to be applied for in each country separately.
> 
> To ease  the process of applying for patents in many countries
> at once Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) was formed. When you

It's also true that many countried have bilateral treatings
respecting the "intellectual property" in the other country.  Canada
has such with the US, as far as I know, so that it is possible to
request injunctive relief in Canada for violation of a patent which is
grated by the USPTO.  The relief is limited, however, and requires
certain hoop-jumping which is sort of tiresome.  Unless, of course,
you have a large, full time legal staff and you're already a
multinational.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan  | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
The plural of anecdote is not data.    --Roger Brinner


Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...

From
"J. Andrew Rogers"
Date:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:22:58 +0200
>Many countries do not grant software patents so it is not 
>likely
>that IBM applied through PCT since a refusal in one 
>country may
>cause to patent to be refused in all countries.


Contrary to popular misconception, virtually all countries 
grant software patents.  The problem is that people have 
applied the term "software patent" to USPTO-specific 
lameness like "one-click shopping", which really is 
outside the scope of traditional software patents.  While 
most countries do not grant patents for this flavor of 
frivolousness, they do grant hard-theory algorithm design 
patents across virtually all types of machinery (including 
virtual machinery).

Traditional software design patents are structurally and 
functionally indistinguishable from chemical process 
patents, which are generally recognized as valid in most 
countries.  Software patents have to have novelty that 
survives reduction to general process design (and the ARC 
algorithm looks like it qualifies) if you want most 
countries to grant it.  The problem with USPTO and 
so-called "software patents" is that they allow people to 
patent what is essentially prior art with re-named 
variables.  Chemical process patents are a good analogy 
because literally every argument used against "software 
patents" could be used against chemical process patents, 
which no one apparently finds controversial.  What often 
passes for material "novel-ness" in software processes 
with the USPTO would never fly for chemical processes with 
the same USPTO.  If someone invents a better pipe alloy 
for carrying chemical fluids, you cannot re-patent all 
chemical processes with the novelty being that you use a 
better type of pipe -- that change is not material to the 
chemical process, even if it improves the economics of it 
in some fashion.  The only thing patentable would be the 
superior alloy design in the abstract.

Most of the lame "software patents" are lame because 
reduction to machine process design gives you something 
that is decidedly non-novel.  In other words, the 
"novel-ness" is the semantic dressing-up of a non-novel 
engineering process.

cheers,

j. andrew rogers


Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...

From
Hannu Krosing
Date:
Ühel kenal päeval (esmaspäev, 17. jaanuar 2005, 21:45-0300), kirjutas
Alvaro Herrera:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:31:48PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> > Just curious here, but are patents global?  PostgreSQL is not US software,
> > but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through,
> > only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow
> > transcend international borders?
>
> No, they are limited to the territory they are registered in.
>
> Not sure how that applies to somebody who just uses Postgres in the US;
> of course, IANAL.

USAmericans can just place their servers somewhere not under US
jurisdiction (Cuba) or even better, in legal vacuum (Quantanamo) and run
client over internet.

If something infringes then it surely is the server, not the client.

--
Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>


Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...

From
Reinoud van Leeuwen
Date:
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 11:38:45AM -0800, J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:22:58 +0200
> >Many countries do not grant software patents so it is not 
> >likely
> >that IBM applied through PCT since a refusal in one 
> >country may
> >cause to patent to be refused in all countries.
> 
> 
> Contrary to popular misconception, virtually all countries 
> grant software patents.  The problem is that people have 

Thanks to the new European Union member Poland, the Dutch plan to put the 
software patents on the agenda 3 days before Christmas was revoked. So no 
software patents in Europe for now. (and the opposition against it seems 
to grow!)

-- 
__________________________________________________
"Nothing is as subjective as reality"
Reinoud van Leeuwen    reinoud.v@n.leeuwen.net
http://www.xs4all.nl/~reinoud
__________________________________________________


Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...

From
Bruce Momjian
Date:
Hannu Krosing wrote:
> ?hel kenal p?eval (esmasp?ev, 17. jaanuar 2005, 21:45-0300), kirjutas
> Alvaro Herrera:
> > On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:31:48PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > 
> > > Just curious here, but are patents global?  PostgreSQL is not US software, 
> > > but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through, 
> > > only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow 
> > > transcend international borders?
> > 
> > No, they are limited to the territory they are registered in.
> > 
> > Not sure how that applies to somebody who just uses Postgres in the US;
> > of course, IANAL.
> 
> USAmericans can just place their servers somewhere not under US
> jurisdiction (Cuba) or even better, in legal vacuum (Quantanamo) and run
> client over internet.
> 
> If something infringes then it surely is the server, not the client.

Yes, our development group itself is perhaps OK, but that doesn't help
US companies using it, nor US companies packaging/distributing
commerical versions of PostgreSQL.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
 


Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...

From
Dawid Kuroczko
Date:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:05:57 +0100, Reinoud van Leeuwen
<reinoud.v@n.leeuwen.net> wrote:
> > Contrary to popular misconception, virtually all countries
> > grant software patents.  The problem is that people have
> 
> Thanks to the new European Union member Poland, the Dutch plan to put the
> software patents on the agenda 3 days before Christmas was revoked. So no
> software patents in Europe for now. (and the opposition against it seems
> to grow!)

Since Poland's name has been called, Poland is a sample of a Eurpean
country which does not grant software/algorithm/etc patents neither
directly nor in form of 'technological method' (our patent office is well,
very conservative institution :)).

As for the EU voting, it was the first time I was really glad that Poland
entered Union.  Both ways.  First that way that powers like USA cannot
force their way with patents on Poland, second that Poland give positive
input into EU.

Ahhh, politics, enough of it.  Let's end this thread. ;)
  Regards,    Dawid