I never really cared much about IP until I started using Linux about 2 years ago and the more I learn the more Pissed I get.
I read this story and also went to view most of the 500 Patent
IBM opended up. And I can't believe that the U.S. Patent Office is so Dumb. Some of the Patens are so crazy it would be funny if they weren't real. They are akin to (I want a patent cause I got in my black car and drove to the store on a certain path. So nobody else can drive that way in a black car unless they pay me.) It's complete BS! I say there should not be IP or any patents on it. Im a programer in training and as far as i care "ALL YOUR" code is open for me to learn from and use if you don't like it to bad. Make your code/program Sell it if you can. If not it wasn't good enough. If someone else later comes out with somthing similar that is better and out selling your software then you should have thought of it first. The Best will always beat out the rest no matter what. Biz is all about the money right so when you sale a program make sure it is the best. And quit trying to make up for your short comings by suing
people its the lazy mans way of making money.

Some of them look good to me..

From the Press Release and the list is on the IBM web site.

[visit link]

I think some of the ones they released are so they can build better Open Source Systems using IBM Global Services without getting stuck later.

It is a Leap in the right direction, Also if MS claims any of them and tries to Sue the Open Source Community. Then IBM has a Right to Remove it From the MS Collection (MS has free use of all IBM Patents and IBM has Free Use of MS's). This would break XP instantly if not MS SQL. This new clause makes it harder for MS to stop IBM Selling Open source Boxes, and services.

Patents included in the pledge relate to many aspects of software innovation. Several of the patents cover dynamic linking processes for operating systems. Another is valuable to file-export protocols. The pledged patents cover a wide spectrum, including patents on operating systems, databases, methods for testing programming interfaces, and even cursive text recognition.

IBM has patents dating back to near the beginning of time, does anyone know off hand how old any of these patents are. If all their doing is giving up the rights on things as old as DOS 3.1, of what use is that to the open source community.

///The Piltdown hoax inspired David Hannum to declare, "There's a sucker born every minute"... and IBM was listening.///

Ouch! rather harsh, no?

> The strength of the Open Source licenses has always
> been that they were based on Copyright law and in ten
> years no one has been able to mount challenge against
> them.

The Piltdown man was "discovered" in 1913 and wasn't
exposed as a fake until fifty years later in 1953.

The Piltdown hoax inspired David Hannum to declare, "There's a sucker born every minute"... and IBM was listening.

The strength of the Open Source licenses has always been that they were based on Copyright law and in ten years no one has been able to mount challenge against them.

The patent card was always a worry and it was only a matter of time until Microsoft's stock price drops to the point where Microsoft (themselves or through another proxy like SCO) would have initiated a patent based attack.

IBM have signaled in the past that they would use their patent portfolio to defend their open source interests (principally Linux and the GPL) and this latest very public statement of support for open source in general is very welcome.

Thank you IBM and you are welcome to the profits that result from including open source in your business plan.

IBM knows full well that you can't implement
a "public" license to regulate derivative works.
It's against public policy. Those OSI licenses
are prattling nonsense.

Congress reserved the sole right to regulate
copyrights in the public domain by passing
section 301 of the Copyright Act.

IBM just wants cuddly little open-sourcers to
like it before it eats them. The patent license
isn't worth the match required to burn it.

Daniel Wallace

This is very good for free sofwtare and it is very good for the economy. I love how IBM apparently both get free software, and is intend of passing this understanding to others. It was seen in the Linux prodigy commercial which in very simple terms explained the power of free software to laymen, and it is seen in this quote from the article:

In recent speeches, for example, Samuel J. Palmisano, I.B.M.'s chief executive, has emphasized the need for more open technology standards and collaboration as a way to stimulate economic growth and job creation.

What I don't see is how it directly help IBM. Of course, economic growth and job creation will indirectly help IBM, as IBM will likely take its fair share of an expanding economy. However, that would put "enligthened self interest" to the extreme, with a bit of hybris in it. Red Hat can calculate that way, better have a smaller part of big Linux market, than dominate a small Linux market. But IBM isn't as dominating in the world economy as Red Hat is in the Linux market.

Of course it is possible that the move is a pure PR stunt, and the patents are worthless anyway. But I'm not that cynical.

If I were to use some patented algorithm *shudder* in a BSD Licensed program, could someone take that and wrap it up in a closed source program? Or could they just take the non-patented code? Or would it reduce the BSD license to effectively another GPL by forcing the code to stay open?

Surely this has been in the pipline for a long time? Who is behind it?

Is this something IBM has done of its own accord, or is there an organisation out there (eg. OSDL) driving this? Consequently, is IBM the only company to do this, or are they the first cab off the rank with other companies to follow quickly?

Anyone have some answers?

///Think of how Linux's growth could be helped over the next few years if the overhang of MS lawsuits was removed, and their ability to embrace and extend using patents was curtailed? Maybe I'm dreaming, but its a good dream!///

how right you are - and you gotta have a dream, because if you don't have a dream, then how you gonna have a dream come true

IBM is losing nothing here. What they have gained is a great deal of goodwill, and given open-source development a boost. Remember they have a great deal of experience in bulding upon open-source projects, where there competitors generally do not - so anything good for open-source is good for IBM at the moment.
This is a smart move by smart people, and it follows in the footsteps of other smart moves. This is an indicator that IBM really understands how open-source can help their business, and if IBM continue in this fashion, they will make a great deal of money while the rest of the world catches up with them in the open-source stakes.

What would be really cool is if IBM reworked its cross licensing agreements it has with big companies like Microsoft to say that they can only use IBM's patents if they extend their cross license to allow open source products to be used.

MS is still a relative newcomer to patents, but IBM is an old pro. As there are surely hundreds or thousands of patents IBM owns that are used by Windows, Office, etc. and probably only dozens that IBM software would make use of, IBM has the strong hand and could do this.

Think of how Linux's growth could be helped over the next few years if the overhang of MS lawsuits was removed, and their ability to embrace and extend using patents was curtailed? Maybe I'm dreaming, but its a good dream!

much as I appreciate that decision from IBM, I remain skeptical about the real potential of the licensed patents.
A few months ago I was working on a project that required the use of a particular data compression method (arithmetic coding), because of its great efficiency on the type of data I was supposed to process (uncompressed output from various audio codecs, including experimental ones). IBM owns no less than 19 patents on that algorithm and its derivatives. Sure, the first 3 of them are expired by now, but none of the others were in the 500 list.

Data compression is one of the areas where pure software patents are commonplace and very annoying, which makes your choices very narrow when it comes to choosing a compression method for your projects.

This is great. I think IBM should be commended for this (assuming it's for a legit purpose).

This could be a huge "cold-war" style arms/IP race. These days when people vote with their wallets, it's nice to see that viable candidates are emerging...