Re: [9fans] The PATENTED IBM MULTI-PIPE : the evolution of unix pipes

[Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com>]

On Mar 15, 2013, at 6:21 AM, mycroftiv@sphericalharmony.com wrote:
> Anyway, I thought the world deserved to have a non-patent encumbered
> version of Multi-pipes that could deliver very similar functionality,
> but not conflict with IBM's Patented Invention.  So, I used
> /dev/timemachine to send some software back in time to 2009, before I
> could see any trace of IBM Multi-pipes.  I sent the Iosrv and Hubfs
> software back to the sources server between 7/01/09 and 8/01/09 (you
> can check the dump) so in this way I thought I could avoid any
> potential issues with IBM's legal team.

Patents are different from copyright. I don't think it matters whether you saw the IBM patent info or not when you developed your code. From what I understand, if you used the same technique you *may be* violating the patent even if you independently came up with the idea. If it is same or close enough, what matters is if your code can be shown as prior art.   Whether software patents are evil or not and whether the current patent system is broken are meta issues and don't really influence how specific patent issues are resolved. 

Usual caveats apply.