Field of use

[Mark Wielaard]

On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 16:05 +0100, Volker Simonis wrote:
> In my opinion http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Java_and_patents seems to be a
> strange site and I wouldn't rely too much on it:
>
> - it claims that "GPLv2 includes two implicit patent licenses" but as
> far as I know, this is still a controversial topic (see for example:
> http://www.fenwick.com/docstore/Publications/IP/potential_defenses.pdf)
> and one of the reasons why GPLv3 was created. (By the way,  this topic
> has already been extensively discussed on this list:
> http://old.nabble.com/Licensing-questions-to27254043.html#a27258107)

I don't know why you keep bringing up that paper and claim it is
controversial while it was pointed out to you in the same thread you
reference that the conclusion of that paper is precisely what the
software patent website claims:

"from available case law, it is reasonable to conclude
that the implied license defense is available and tenable
for a defendant in a patent suit involving software
released under the GPL." 

> you are quite safe until you made your first billion dollars. Then of
> course with every additional billion there's an increasing risc of
> getting sued for patent infringements :)

Haha. Yes, I think that is a good rule of thumb! :)

Cheers,

Mark