 |
 |
Just wanted to say thanks for the many responses. You all are right that this issue is not specific to library software in specific. It's not often that I hear such a resounding agreement from all responders!! -emily On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Erik Hetzner <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > At Mon, 5 Dec 2011 08:17:26 -0500, > Emily Lynema wrote: > > > > A colleague approached me this morning with an interesting question that > I > > realized I didn't know how to answer. How are open source projects in the > > library community dancing around technologies that may have been patented > > by vendors? We were particularly wondering about this in light of open > > source ILS projects, like Kuali OLE, Koha, and Evergreen. I know OLE is > > still in the early stages, but did the folks who created Koha and > Evergreen > > ever run into any problems in this area? Have library vendors > historically > > pursued patents for their systems and solutions? > > I don’t think libraries have a particularly unique perspective on > this: most free/open source software projects have the same issues > with patents. > > The Software Freedom Law Center has some basic information about these > issues. As I recall, the “Legal basics for developers” edition of > their podcasts is useful [1], but other editions may be helpful as > well. > > Basically, the standard advice for patents is what Mike Taylor gave: > ignore them. Pay attention to copyright and trademark issues (as the > Koha problem shows), but patents really don’t need to be on your > radar. > > best, Erik > > 1. > http://www.softwarefreedom.org/podcast/2011/aug/16/Episode-0x16-Legal-Basics-for-Developers/ > > Sent from my free software system <http://fsf.org/>. > >