Re: ZFS

[Steven Bellovin <smb%cs.columbia.edu@localhost>]

On Nov 9, 2009, at 4:55 AM, Matthew Mondor wrote:

> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 09:50:52 +0100
> vincent <10.50%free.fr@localhost> wrote:
>
> > I was just wondering if, given the current environment, it was really
> > worth carrying on work on ZFS rather than waiting for the whole  
> > affair
> > to subside.
>
> If ZFS could be built as an optional module, would it mitigate the
> issue?  I.e. delegating risks to every entity deciding to use it, but
> default distributions missing the functionality?

Possibly, possibly not.  Patents govern the right to make, sell,  
import, or use the covered invention, though generally the patent  
owners go after the creator of the infringing device.  If it isn't  
patented in, say, Europe, and all development were done there, no  
offenses would be committed except by someone who imported the code  
into (for example) the US.

Also note that for "willful infringement" -- you knew something was  
patented but went ahead anyway -- the damages are tripled.

                --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb