🚀 go-pugleaf

ObDisclaimer:  I speak for myself, not for the company.

Matt Smith (msmith@unislc.slc.unisys.com) wrote:
: : Every time a user runs the `compress' program, they are violating
: : Unisys's patent.  Unisys has said they won't sue you for having run it
: : in the past, but they have *not* said anything to block them from
: : suing you in the future for future uses of compress.

: Wrong.  That isn't how patents work.  The person who WROTE the
: compress program is the one violating the Unisys patent, not the USER
: of the program.  Therefore, anything that was WRITTEN to perform LZW
: compression/decompression before January 10 is ok.

: Think of it this way.  If someone had patented a particular method for
: building cars, and another company used that exact same method for
: making cars, then would it be the manufacturer or the people who
: bought the cars who would be infringing on the patent?  It obviously
: would be the manufacturer

I was corrected by someone I know who is a patent lawywer.  A person
using a "compress" program violating a patent *would* be also
violating a patent.  You do bring up a possibly sticky point.

Apparently my analogy wasn't quite correct.  In the case of the
compression technique, the user actually USES the technique to
compress/decomopress the data, whereas the user of the car is using
just the end product.  My analogy would be closer if we were arguing
whether or not people could own compressed data, which obviously we're not.

: The lack of understanding and of incorrect "facts" floating around The
: Net is scary as well.  Of course, this is nothing new... ;)

Including me apparently... *sigh*

: : I would urge people to take just about everything they say
: : with a very large grain of salt.

: Always good advice..

And apparently still is... ;)

--
Matt Smith  -  msmith@unislc.slc.unisys.com
http://www.cs.utah.edu/~msmith/home.html
"Don't count your weasels before they pop dink!" -- The Tick