1 |
Joshua Kinard wrote: |
2 |
> > I'm not entirely sure what you'd like to ask the libtomcrypt authors. |
3 |
> > "We think there may be patents, but we don't know. Did you consider |
4 |
> > that?" |
5 |
> |
6 |
> No, actually, I was thinking something more along the lines of "Hey, are you |
7 |
> aware of these supposed patent claims about ECC/ECDSA implementations that |
8 |
> Red Hat says exist, and if so, did you do any research on them that you |
9 |
> could possibly share that led you to feeling confident to release your |
10 |
> implementation into the public domain". |
11 |
> |
12 |
> But I am open to better language. |
13 |
|
14 |
There's not neccessarily a conflict between a patented idea and a |
15 |
public domain implementation of that idea. |
16 |
|
17 |
Take a fictional example: |
18 |
|
19 |
You and I independently invent the same thing. You patent it, then |
20 |
write and publish an LGPL implementation. I, ignorant of your |
21 |
accomplishment, later write and publish a different implementation, |
22 |
placing it in the public domain. |
23 |
|
24 |
You having a patent doesn't neccessarily matter to me publishing my |
25 |
implementation. |
26 |
|
27 |
It can be problematic for *users*. They might violate your patent |
28 |
terms (or not; it depends on your terms in the patent) if they use |
29 |
*any* implementation without having licensed the right to use your |
30 |
patented idea from you. (Of course only until your patent expires.) |
31 |
|
32 |
What users have to do is determined by the terms set forth in the |
33 |
patent. E.g.: the QR-code patent has (I believe) not expired yet but |
34 |
has always permitted using the idea without any explicit license under |
35 |
the condition that all use is actually spec conformant. |
36 |
|
37 |
The license for a software isn't connected to patents unless it |
38 |
explicitly states so, like GPL-3 Section 11 or Apache-2.0 Section 3. |
39 |
Public domain has no license text, so can have no such language. :) |
40 |
|
41 |
You seem to expect some due diligence from libtomcrypt authors before |
42 |
having decided to publish their work and I don't find that reasonable. |
43 |
I hope I've managed to explain why? |
44 |
|
45 |
|
46 |
Kind regards |
47 |
|
48 |
//Peter |