On 29 August 2014 10:32, Chris via Digitalmars-d <[email protected]> wrote: >> In fact, the patent looks like an explanation of how immutability works in >> D. > > > This is why I don't believe in "coincidence". This could be either an > attempt to crush D or some people might have realized that D's way of > handling immutability is the way to go and they want to own it (or both). > Where I'm from this is called "rip-off", "theft" or just "being a c**t". >
This is just FUD. Software patents in practice are now not only of generally poor quality, they are totally opposed to their original reason for existence. >From my observation (newspapers, mostly), having a software patent is utterly useless, and not being tied to any particular network or device just doesn't hold water nowadays in court (in varying degrees across countries). Iain
