From: Greg Colvin (gcolvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-10-20 10:44:23
From: Beman Dawes <beman_at_[hidden]>
> Greg Colvin wrote:
>
> >Of course, with the US Patent Office churning out thousands of
> >software patents there is every chance that some Boost code already
> >violates some patents. If so I wonder if Boost itself is liable, or
> >if responsibility rests on those who use Boost to create an actual
> >product?
> >
> >If Boost is liable what are we supposed to do about it?
> >
> >I myself refuse to read any patents, on the grounds that knowingly
> >violating a patent is a worse crime than unknowingly doing so.
>
> Let sleeping dogs lie.
Oracle's patent attorney gave me the same advice.
> We aren't lawyers; we could talk about patents all day but it would just be
> speculation.
Agreed. My point is that I'm not inclined to reject a Boost
submission just because someone claims it might violate a patent.