diff options
| author | Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> | 2016-10-14 06:57:57 -0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2016-10-14 10:58:04 +0000 |
| commit | 4a796d6bd712acf2147b6f087e92b31ee7956390 (patch) | |
| tree | 1d94eed971c42f27045655688e3bbaa59e754152 | |
| parent | 3af8cdc26989e5fb1b69d6954d94d80977f3ba3c (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-4a796d6bd712acf2147b6f087e92b31ee7956390.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-4a796d6bd712acf2147b6f087e92b31ee7956390.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] DPL is not only not enough, but brings unfounded confidence to Bitcoin users
| -rw-r--r-- | 37/209d633c758da52fde91c6d94aa846202d7bf4 | 187 |
1 files changed, 187 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/37/209d633c758da52fde91c6d94aa846202d7bf4 b/37/209d633c758da52fde91c6d94aa846202d7bf4 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..2a90c7fce --- /dev/null +++ b/37/209d633c758da52fde91c6d94aa846202d7bf4 @@ -0,0 +1,187 @@ +Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FBA69D + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Fri, 14 Oct 2016 10:58:04 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from outmail149095.authsmtp.com (outmail149095.authsmtp.com + [62.13.149.95]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92F97D5 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Fri, 14 Oct 2016 10:58:03 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from mail-c232.authsmtp.com (mail-c232.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.232]) + by punt24.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u9EAw1Kd038858; + Fri, 14 Oct 2016 11:58:01 +0100 (BST) +Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com + [52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0) + by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u9EAvxM1062713 + (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); + Fri, 14 Oct 2016 11:58:00 +0100 (BST) +Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8DD824013C; + Fri, 14 Oct 2016 10:53:51 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) + id 4CE2220732; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 06:57:57 -0400 (EDT) +Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 06:57:57 -0400 +From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> +To: Sergio Demian Lerner <sergio.d.lerner@gmail.com>, + Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Message-ID: <20161014105757.GA8049@fedora-21-dvm> +References: <CAKzdR-oaqUicPhCjfbyX92odVs9LOzvhUOY6nyd9K2RdC_9b_g@mail.gmail.com> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; + protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="DocE+STaALJfprDB" +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <CAKzdR-oaqUicPhCjfbyX92odVs9LOzvhUOY6nyd9K2RdC_9b_g@mail.gmail.com> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) +X-Server-Quench: 12917c79-91fd-11e6-829e-00151795d556 +X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: + http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse +X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR + aAdMdwYUF1YAAgsB AmAbWlVeVVV7WWM7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq + T0pMXVMcUQwdcFpJ ex8eVBt1dgYIeX9y bUYsX3JSXUMpck9g + S08CQXAHZDJmdWgd WRVFdwNVdQJNdxoR b1V5GhFYa3VsNCMk + FAgyOXU9MCtqYAht ZkkMNhoURlpDGTg4 VlgEGilnEEsCWioz + a1QsN0JUFlwQNEop eUYnV1UFNRMfBm8W FEZLDi5VKl8KSmI3 + CktwXFIVFzxbCTpH DwczSgCI +X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1037:706 +X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) +X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25 +X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own + anti-virus system. +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW + autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on + smtp1.linux-foundation.org +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] DPL is not only not enough, + but brings unfounded confidence to Bitcoin users +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 +Precedence: list +List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 10:58:04 -0000 + + +--DocE+STaALJfprDB +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 07:38:07AM -0300, Sergio Demian Lerner via bitcoin-= +dev wrote: +> I read the DPL v1.1 and I find it dangerous for Bitcoin users. Current +> users may be confident they are protected but in fact they are not, as the +> future generations of users can be attacked, making Bitcoin technology +> fully proprietary and less valuable. + +Glad to hear you're taking a conservative approach. + +So I assume Rootstock is going to do something stronger then, like +Blockstream's DPL + binding patent pledge to only use patents defensively? + + https://www.blockstream.com/about/patent_pledge/ + +Because if not, the DPL is still better than the status quo. + +> If you read the DPL v1.1 you will see that companies that join DPL can +> enforce their patents against anyone who has chosen not to join the DPL. +> (http://defensivepatentlicense.org/content/defensive-patent-license) +>=20 +> So basically most users of Bitcoin could be currently under threat of bei= +ng +> sued by Bitcoin companies and individuals that joined DPL in the same way +> they might be under threat by the remaining companies. And even if they +> joined DPL, they may be asked to pay royalties for the use of the +> inventions prior joining DPL. +>=20 +> DPL changes nothing for most individuals that cannot and will not hire +> patent attorneys to advise them on what the DPL benefits are and what +> rights they are resigning. Remember that patten attorneys fees may be +> prohibitive for individuals in under-developed countries. +>=20 +> Also DPL is revocable by the signers (with only a 180-day notice), so if +> Bitcoin Core ends up using ANY DPL covered patent, the company owning the +> patent can later force all new Bitcoin users to pay royalties. + +Indeed. However, you're also free to adopt the DPL irrevocably by additiona= +lly +stating that you will never invoke that 180-day notice provision (or more +humorously, make it a 100 year notice period to ensure any patents expire!). + +If you're concerned about this problem, I'd suggest that Rootstock do exact= +ly +that. + +> Because Bitcoin user base grows all the time with new individuals, the so= +le +> existence of DPL licensed patents in Bitcoin represents a danger to Bitco= +in +> future almost the same as the existence of non-DPL license patents. + +To be clear, modulo the revocability provision, it's a danger mainly to tho= +se +who are unwilling to adopt the DPL themselves, perhaps because they support +software patents. + +> If you're publishing all your ideas and code (public disclosure), you +> cannot later go and file a patent in most of the world except the US, whe= +re +> you have a 1 year grace period. So we need to do something specific to +> prevent the publishers filing a US patent. + +Again, lets remember that you personally proposed a BIP[1] that had the eff= +ect +of aiding your ASICBOOST patent[2] without disclosing that fact in your BIP= + nor +your pull-req[3]. The simple fact is we can't rely solely on voluntary +disclosure - your own behavior is a perfect example of why not. + +[1]: BIP: https://github.com/BlockheaderNonce2/bitcoin/wiki +[2]: ASICBOOST PATENT https://www.google.com/patents/WO2015077378A1?cl=3Den +[3]: Extra nonce pull request: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5102 + +> What we need much more than DPL, we need that every BIP and proposal to t= +he +> Bitcoin mailing list contains a note that grants all Bitcoin users a +> worldwide, royalty-free, no-charge, non-exclusive, irrevocable license for +> the content of the e-mail or BIP. + +A serious problem here is the definition of "Bitcoin users". Does Bitcoin +Classic count? Bitcoin Unlimited? What if Bitcoin forks? + +Better to grant _everyone_ a irrevocable license. + + +Along those lines, it'd be reasonable to consider changing the Bitcoin Core +license to something like an Apache2/LGPL3 dual license to ensure the copyr= +ight +license also has anti-patent protections. + +--=20 +https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org + +--DocE+STaALJfprDB +Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" +Content-Description: Digital signature + +-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- + +iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYALoyAAoJEGOZARBE6K+yf+EH/0YPBCb1poEiV+UJeCdVyYjl +SLh4Z8lDgHS6JbL7mb6t9B9dT5JnVjFpgq1D8K50KaEyxuufmXiIpRlnylJZOr4s +IAmm9XFfbO0jXwMw04z49V3ZyA7rABuue5JrQo0tS841udyaV9stS/vx4vgwl81u +r4r2OblJ3iXB04D1GDHE0NYRP37CHX8HR540gBFS+GMSEoRRQuzPJwSGrpE5zrgq +Hx9/7+LaH0Q2XJzYnzdwj+btPcW8iHC4PGUyl5ia+7dr+t8JRgRHvMtZy+rfTI7P +IFIGFnjdCwetGlewWgdBXjcGafx9+Sc4Ngktas0O04gEYR9q0wVry7lrYVeaGvU= +=zUJV +-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- + +--DocE+STaALJfprDB-- + |