views:

231

answers:

4

Let’s say the Company A released the project under open source license. The Company B includes the work of the Company A into their solution and sells the solution to the Company C. If sometime in the future the Company D announces that the Company A’s implementation infringes their patent. What companies will be involved in the resolution of the infringement case? Thanks

P.S. Not looking for legal advice, just looking how open source community addresses this problem

A: 

Involved is a pretty wide net. I'd guess that everyone would get sued and the courts would sort it out.

MichaelGG
Ah, i love the smell of blood in the water. ;)
Don Branson
A: 

What, you mean like this?

http://www.cloanto.com/users/mcb/19950127giflzw.html

:)

GIF code wasn't 'open source' since the concept wasn't really around then - but I think this gets more to what you are worried about.

Joe
+2  A: 

Hi, a question as open as yours is answered with:

  1. it depends
  2. everyone
  3. read this
  4. google for sco patent war
  5. IMO (which doesn't count for much) this would always be something that gets sorted on a case by case, the people involved are the ones who would be indicted or willfully want to participate (as in the case with SCO) to help out and be fair
Ric Tokyo
also suggest reading: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/philosophy.html
Ric Tokyo
+2  A: 

Since you're not asking for legal advice I don't need that silly disclaimer I always have to use.

Anyways, it depends what was done first - the patent or the open source release. Let's say it's the patent. If that's the case, A, B and C will be liable for infringement because corporation D has...

"the right to exclude others from making, using or selling the invention throughout the United States".

Now, let's say that the open source software was released first. Then A, B and C would claim that they had priority (e.g. that the invention was in the public domain before the patent was issued) and the infringement claim (as well as the patent) would be thrown out.

This is a HUGE oversimplification of the whole deal, but it's a start.

I also addressed the issue here - it's worth taking a look.

Jordan L. Walbesser
you say the op doesn't ask for legal advice, yet you give legal advice?
hop
"In the common law, legal advice is the giving of a formal opinion regarding the substance or procedure of the law by an officer of the court (such as solicitor or barrister), ordinarily in exchange for financial or other tangible compensation" -wikipedia.org
LicenseQ
advice in legal matters, then... what do you mean? he's not talking about the law, because he says he's not talking about the law?
hop
I think Jordan might have a little better idea than the rest of us. Maybe you all want to go look at his profile. Btw, legal advice is totally different than someone speaking of how the law is written. Had Jordan advised against or for a procedure, then that would be legal advice.
WolfmanDragon
you all are missing the point! this discussion is about stuff that has to do with law, not stuff that has to do with programming. agreed?
hop
There is no separation of the two, at least here in U.S.A. This is a subject that all of us had better be studying. At least the ones of us who make a living writing code. It might not be your cup of tea, but the genie is out of the bottle and it looks like that it will only get worse.
WolfmanDragon
WolfmanDragon
so every programmer has to get a degree in ip law as well?
hop
whether there is a "patent war" in my country or not, if i want to protect myself against problems with the law, i _hire_ _a_ _laywer_, not a programmer.
hop
No, but sometimes we don't even know enough to ask the right questions. Perhaps someone had never thought far enough ahead to even think of needing a lawyer. What is the purpose of this site? If it to make us better programmers than this is good subject material.
WolfmanDragon
If it is just too prove how cool and nerdy we are then I've been coming to the wrong site. I don't need this site to stroke my ego.
WolfmanDragon
knowing about patents will not make my code better and being sued to smithereens will not make my code less good. and why are you reacting so hostile?
hop
Why, because of the double standard that exists here. If it is ok to sharehumor about programming what is the problem with talking about something that might bankrupt us. It has to be one way or the other. If the Jokes and Cartoons go, then I will no longer defend questions such as this.
WolfmanDragon
show me where i ever "shared humor about programming"... this is a community of individuals -- not the borg.
hop
This is not about you and me. I am simply stating why this is a relevant question, as per what questions are allowed on site. What comes next, I don't use the .net framework so will my questions be banned next?
WolfmanDragon
Wow, a lot of comments here - LicenseQ is right. "Legal advice" has ramifications for a lawyer (namely I could be sued for malpractice). I know it seems silly, but the purpose of those disclaimers are to make sure that people don't think an attorney-client relationship exists.
Jordan L. Walbesser