1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
|
Return-Path: <nickodell@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F5BB905
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 14 Oct 2016 19:01:15 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-oi0-f51.google.com (mail-oi0-f51.google.com
[209.85.218.51])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BED34A6
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 14 Oct 2016 19:01:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-oi0-f51.google.com with SMTP id y2so148046215oie.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:01:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=Dy27Rk1Sf1APmj51wTXBu4+8Elmsd1xggQBEwz76OLU=;
b=UCqCzXjowPVQDcx70t9t4SekKq0peAf+8N4ojtqOcieIHVEqJBo8zdZ8voj/e5ggzN
Z5dAiTYwSRprD46Uo+kP5cq3a2ntY5Pwnu+98+B4HZj/pDE/yEKMJhhwWJMnYsqnVAEX
PFie9fl7KF6scV4DpEDBjJIvdnJTt8Gj+MKpa7GdPIYJRMO8iph4J9kqvkWfHk4AIhyV
VuoA96eOKSTDu2W3Pn9B9yZtSjIxndMcCWCyZN1EIE/bc1gbh/YWg/F35Wm5HbOnwiQb
OwEFmar6rqei6LdLpUZSewv6QKcU8eK6fpH3s5iZAg+YkeOaRdG/iqaRjAJQrmTzF8oz
p3Dw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to;
bh=Dy27Rk1Sf1APmj51wTXBu4+8Elmsd1xggQBEwz76OLU=;
b=PIUfnY8mcpYLNBHE6LC9twj1MrLiyXrwH4NOAx/mmFeGHmQafT7MdusTDMDsOVXJ6K
4PS0OOyGicFhvzMyUtLVR8rRGc4t/DftuKSBKLRou8S/f1Gaw4oCbAM9nyqRv/DGPyVN
BNlZDezkQC8tv9jZoP/lF4OJHnOri8pf2T9t4Ok6nYKK4sQNgOnXvWxrZG++GMCHTx3g
8VZcsryeC/LNwNGEfn9xPPKuswXwpOCONEQERrSTzYv7gAwIs4QcPl2pHJu7JHgLZ8by
FhNzb8o4eKbjwh/Prr9e4VNgPmLq+9+2A6iOuvGguRtMUkVimjN5pnu9B98f3Zxuo9tZ
opjQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RkdQYsu9MilY7bagM8cAPn5eYCyVnyWsQ/heULQ/Ez2OfWmZeDVr9MsgCHRRLJy9ViotIQzbPNAGWpPCQ==
X-Received: by 10.202.83.70 with SMTP id h67mr9118678oib.39.1476471674046;
Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:01:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.182.111.67 with HTTP; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:01:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20161014105757.GA8049@fedora-21-dvm>
References: <CAKzdR-oaqUicPhCjfbyX92odVs9LOzvhUOY6nyd9K2RdC_9b_g@mail.gmail.com>
<20161014105757.GA8049@fedora-21-dvm>
From: Nick ODell <nickodell@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 13:01:13 -0600
Message-ID: <CANN4kmefhJ+t9--JV+g1aZgX_wyw+hKqAeBm6=UOUBROVS7VpA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE 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 19:01:15 -0000
Pledging to not use patents offensively defeats the point of owning patents.
The point of owning a patent is so that you can use it offensively, either to
prevent competition, or get licensing fees.
Obtaining a patent for defense doesn't make sense. The litigants you need to
worry about do not produce or make anything. Their 'product' is patent lawsuits.
Unless you have a patent on using a mail-merge program to sue people, your
defensive patents are useless in that situation.
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 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)
>>
>> So basically most users of Bitcoin could be currently under threat of being
>> 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.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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 additionally
> 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 exactly
> that.
>
>> Because Bitcoin user base grows all the time with new individuals, the sole
>> existence of DPL licensed patents in Bitcoin represents a danger to Bitcoin
>> 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 those
> 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, where
>> 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 effect
> 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=en
> [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 the
>> 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 copyright
> license also has anti-patent protections.
>
> --
> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
|
