Just curious here, but are patents global? PostgreSQL is not US software,
but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through,
only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow
transcend international borders?

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

From:	Alvaro Herrera
Subject:	Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...
Date:	Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:45:45 -0300

On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:31:48PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:

> Just curious here, but are patents global? PostgreSQL is not US software,
> but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through,
> only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow
> transcend international borders?

No, they are limited to the territory they are registered in.

Not sure how that applies to somebody who just uses Postgres in the US;
of course, IANAL.

--
Alvaro Herrera ()
www.google.com: interfaz de línea de comando para la web.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)

From:	Nicolai Tufar
Subject:	Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...
Date:	Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:22:58 +0200

Greetings,

Patents do not transcend international border. They need
to be applied for in each country separately.

To ease the process of applying for patents in many countries
at once Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) was formed. When you
file a patent application with WIPO head office under PCT you
specify a list "countries of designation" from list of countries
members of PCT. Filing like this takes significantly less in
paperwork and application fees than filing application in each
country separately.

Many countries do not grant software patents so it is not likely
that IBM applied through PCT since a refusal in one country may
cause to patent to be refused in all countries.

Hope it helps,
Nicolai Tufar

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

From:	Andrew Sullivan
Subject:	Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...
Date:	Tue, 18 Jan 2005 10:49:43 -0500

On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 09:22:58AM +0200, Nicolai Tufar wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Patents do not transcend international border. They need
> to be applied for in each country separately.
>
> To ease the process of applying for patents in many countries
> at once Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) was formed. When you

It's also true that many countried have bilateral treatings
respecting the "intellectual property" in the other country. Canada
has such with the US, as far as I know, so that it is possible to
request injunctive relief in Canada for violation of a patent which is
grated by the USPTO. The relief is limited, however, and requires
certain hoop-jumping which is sort of tiresome. Unless, of course,
you have a large, full time legal staff and you're already a
multinational.

A

--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
The plural of anecdote is not data.
--Roger Brinner

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

From:	Dawid Kuroczko
Subject:	Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2005 19:54:56 +0100

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:05:57 +0100, Reinoud van Leeuwen
wrote:
> > Contrary to popular misconception, virtually all countries
> > grant software patents. The problem is that people have
>
> Thanks to the new European Union member Poland, the Dutch plan to put the
> software patents on the agenda 3 days before Christmas was revoked. So no
> software patents in Europe for now. (and the opposition against it seems
> to grow!)

Since Poland's name has been called, Poland is a sample of a Eurpean
country which does not grant software/algorithm/etc patents neither
directly nor in form of 'technological method' (our patent office is well,
very conservative institution :)).

As for the EU voting, it was the first time I was really glad that Poland
entered Union. Both ways. First that way that powers like USA cannot
force their way with patents on Poland, second that Poland give positive
input into EU.

Ahhh, politics, enough of it. Let's end this thread. ;)

Regards,
Dawid

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

From:	J. Andrew Rogers
Subject:	Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...
Date:	Tue, 18 Jan 2005 11:38:45 -0800

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:22:58 +0200
>Many countries do not grant software patents so it is not
>likely
>that IBM applied through PCT since a refusal in one
>country may
>cause to patent to be refused in all countries.

Contrary to popular misconception, virtually all countries
grant software patents. The problem is that people have
applied the term "software patent" to USPTO-specific
lameness like "one-click shopping", which really is
outside the scope of traditional software patents. While
most countries do not grant patents for this flavor of
frivolousness, they do grant hard-theory algorithm design
patents across virtually all types of machinery (including
virtual machinery).

Traditional software design patents are structurally and
functionally indistinguishable from chemical process
patents, which are generally recognized as valid in most
countries. Software patents have to have novelty that
survives reduction to general process design (and the ARC
algorithm looks like it qualifies) if you want most
countries to grant it. The problem with USPTO and
so-called "software patents" is that they allow people to
patent what is essentially prior art with re-named
variables. Chemical process patents are a good analogy
because literally every argument used against "software
patents" could be used against chemical process patents,
which no one apparently finds controversial. What often
passes for material "novel-ness" in software processes
with the USPTO would never fly for chemical processes with
the same USPTO. If someone invents a better pipe alloy
for carrying chemical fluids, you cannot re-patent all
chemical processes with the novelty being that you use a
better type of pipe -- that change is not material to the
chemical process, even if it improves the economics of it
in some fashion. The only thing patentable would be the
superior alloy design in the abstract.

Most of the lame "software patents" are lame because
reduction to machine process design gives you something
that is decidedly non-novel. In other words, the
"novel-ness" is the semantic dressing-up of a non-novel
engineering process.

cheers,

j. andrew rogers

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

From:	Reinoud van Leeuwen
Subject:	Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...
Date:	Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:05:57 +0100

On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 11:38:45AM -0800, J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:22:58 +0200
> >Many countries do not grant software patents so it is not
> >likely
> >that IBM applied through PCT since a refusal in one
> >country may
> >cause to patent to be refused in all countries.
>
>
> Contrary to popular misconception, virtually all countries
> grant software patents. The problem is that people have

Thanks to the new European Union member Poland, the Dutch plan to put the
software patents on the agenda 3 days before Christmas was revoked. So no
software patents in Europe for now. (and the opposition against it seems
to grow!)

--
__________________________________________________
"Nothing is as subjective as reality"
Reinoud van Leeuwen reinoud.v@n.leeuwen.net
http://www.xs4all.nl/~reinoud
__________________________________________________

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

From:	Jaime Casanova
Subject:	Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...
Date:	Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:19:03 -0600 (CST)

--- Alvaro Herrera escribió:

> On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:31:48PM -0400, Marc G.
> Fournier wrote:
>
> > Just curious here, but are patents global?
> PostgreSQL is not US software,
> > but it is run within the US ... so, would this
> patent, if it goes through,
> > only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or
> do patents somehow
> > transcend international borders?
>
> No, they are limited to the territory they are
> registered in.
>
It depends. Every country is independant so their laws
are independants but if they sign a covenant in that
way or if there are any commercial covenants to force
with, countries like US can do their will.

But i think like Tom's. There is nothing to worry
about there are no penalty for violate a non-existing
patent.
And when (if) the patent become a reality i'm sure the
core (you geniuses of programming) have been
eliminated that algorithm.

regards,
Jaime Casanova

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Información de Estados Unidos y América Latina, en Yahoo! Noticias.
Visítanos en http://noticias.espanol.yahoo.com

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html

From:	Hannu Krosing
Subject:	Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...
Date:	Thu, 20 Jan 2005 03:32:09 +0200

Ühel kenal päeval (esmaspäev, 17. jaanuar 2005, 21:45-0300), kirjutas
Alvaro Herrera:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:31:48PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> > Just curious here, but are patents global? PostgreSQL is not US software,
> > but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through,
> > only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow
> > transcend international borders?
>
> No, they are limited to the territory they are registered in.
>
> Not sure how that applies to somebody who just uses Postgres in the US;
> of course, IANAL.

USAmericans can just place their servers somewhere not under US
jurisdiction (Cuba) or even better, in legal vacuum (Quantanamo) and run
client over internet.

If something infringes then it surely is the server, not the client.

--
Hannu Krosing

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match

From:	Bruce Momjian
Subject:	Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2005 11:54:26 -0500 (EST)

Hannu Krosing wrote:
> ?hel kenal p?eval (esmasp?ev, 17. jaanuar 2005, 21:45-0300), kirjutas
> Alvaro Herrera:
> > On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:31:48PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >
> > > Just curious here, but are patents global? PostgreSQL is not US software,
> > > but it is run within the US ... so, would this patent, if it goes through,
> > > only affect those using PostgreSQL in the US, or do patents somehow
> > > transcend international borders?
> >
> > No, they are limited to the territory they are registered in.
> >
> > Not sure how that applies to somebody who just uses Postgres in the US;
> > of course, IANAL.
>
> USAmericans can just place their servers somewhere not under US
> jurisdiction (Cuba) or even better, in legal vacuum (Quantanamo) and run
> client over internet.
>
> If something infringes then it surely is the server, not the client.

Yes, our development group itself is perhaps OK, but that doesn't help
US companies using it, nor US companies packaging/distributing
commerical versions of PostgreSQL.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend