Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 7th Oct 2010 19:10 UTC, submitted by tyrione
General Development LLVM 2.8 has been released. The release notes describe this new, ehm, release in greater detail, so head on over and give it a read.
Permalink for comment 444656
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Software Patents ?
by galvanash on Sun 10th Oct 2010 08:14 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Software Patents ?"
galvanash
Member since:
2006-01-25

Unless you can give an example that's bullshit.


I'm having trouble finding a reference, but there were a chain of cases filed by a company called Lemelson Medical, Education and Research Foundation concerning bar code scanners. They did sue some of the scanner manufacturers, but they also sued businesses that used the scanners (namely some large retail outlets). In the capaicity that the retailers were sued, they were end users of the product (they used it, they didn't sell it). Why did they go after the retailers? Because they had more money...

The case ended up being thrown out (patent was unenforcable), but that is not the point. I didn't say it was easy to sue end-users (it is more difficult). It certainly would not go over well with the media, and judges don't like plantiffs that stir things up... I simply said that you can sue end users... US law specifically states that you can.

Really? Why then does my mobile phone, for example, not give me any indemnification against being sued for patent infringement? When you buy a car do you get indemnification? When you buy a lighter?
These products are no different from software in terms of patent infringement.


I never said software was different - it is exactly the same. You may or may not get indemnification when you buy something, you would have to carefully read your license/bill of sale/warranty to find out if you do. But hardware is no different from software - if you are not indemnified by the manufacturer than you are fair game for legal action in the US - that is just a fact.

Actually, that's exactly the point. The RIAA lawsuits are about copyright and it's an entirely different thing.


No it isn't. Please read this, and if you don't understand it read it again (this is taken directly from US law):

35 U.S.C. 271 Infringement of patent. - Patent Laws

35 U.S.C. 271 Infringement of patent.

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States, or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent.


That is very black and white, and stipulates quite clearly who action can be taken against for patent suits... It doesn't matter at all that you didn't know the thingimabob you bought infringed on a patent. No sure there are consumer protection laws that might trump this kind of thing in court - but that doesn't preclude an end user from being sued.

But hey, the American legal system might just be fucked up enough so that you should worry.


It is just that fucked up. That is what I am trying to tell you... I'm not claiming I like it - I'm just trying to make it clear that you are very very wrong about this.

Reply Parent Score: 2