Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Patents, Open Source & Server-side Development

Author:Will Iverson
Posted:8/23/2000; 2:28:40 PM
Topic:Next survey: Are you an open source developer?
Msg #:19998 (In response to 19977)
Prev/Next:19997 / 19999

First, a few questions...

1. If someone infringes a patent with an open source implementation, who does the person who owns the patent sue? Can they attempt to recover lost revenue? Is it even possible to recover revenue if the open source implementation is done by, say, a Scandinavian university student?

2. If someone infringes a patent in the development of a closed-source server based application, what then? Can that be pursued?

3. If an application is closed, but the binary is freely available via any given P2P system, what is the value of the binary to the developer?

I suspect that much of this debate hinges around the answer to the first question. To date, the only patent that I'm aware of that has impacted significant shareware applications is the Unisys GIF/LZW issue. Which brings about the next question - why haven't more shareware developers been exposed to lawsuits based on patent?

As a partial comment, I have been increasing convinced that the only protectable intellectual asset expressed in software is a server-based application. The GUI remains easy to use, but the implementation and rights to use stay under the control of the original developer. The complexity stays under the control of the original developer.

Another way of saying this is that P2P distribution systems, not to mention old-fashioned piracy, has leapt to the point where client-side installations are probably going the way of the dinosaur - unless the client is really a self-maintaining web application.

Returning to the original question (really! ;) of what an open source developer is, I more or less use the following definition...

- The source code is available for free to all. - The source code is subject to ANY use.

That's it. Does that mean that other companies can take the code and make closed binary versions? Yes, but so what? Given client side distribution via P2P systems, who cares? If it's a server-side app, then also, so what?

The reality (IMHO) is that 1. closed binary versions can't ever diverge from the original base, or they always eventually become dead branches, and 2. the distribution benefits by pushing back to the core will always eventually drown out the gain from the closed tree.

A topic of conversation at another company of late that I'm involved with has been open source projects where only a single company does commits. The question is, is that really open source? My personal inclination is yes, assuming that there aren't restrictions.

Apologies for the long, somewhat rambling post, but this is a very complex topic... ;)

Cheers,

-Will

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:11 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.