You may have heard rumors that I am planning to patent the Panini projection. That is not strictly true, but as I do hope to do something like it, I thought I should make my position clear to the group. I sincerely hope this doesn't start one of those long fruitless discussions about the morality/legality/feasibility of software patents.
I'm well aware that a patent is one of the least effective ways of "protecting" software, and that no patent is likely to generate any income without a viable product to go with it. However I would hate to see the Panini projection become the "property" of Adobe or some other commercial interest, which could happen if they patent an application of it before anyone else does. So earlier this year I filed a "preliminary patent application" with the USPTO, describing the panini-general algorithm (as published in libpano13) and three plausible applications, realized by different combinations of hardware and software. A preliminary application is just a way of establishing priority, and cannot result in a patent. Its main purpose is to support later normal patent applications, and it is valid for just 1 year. As far as I know this type of application has no standing in the E.U. or Britain. So the idea is to apply for proper U.S. patents on some specific uses of the Panini projection -- at least one of them commercially viable -- before next Spring. That will involve hiring a good patent attorney, which can cost a significant amount of money, and possibly other legal costs such as setting up a corporation or foundation to manage the patent rights. So I don't want to do it unless and until there is at least a fair prospect of selling something. Those patents would not claim protection for the Panini projection as such, which is probably not patentable anyhow, but would hopefully make it hard for others to patent or sell similar applications of it. And they might conceivably earn Bruno and me a bit of royalty income. In case any such patents are granted, it is my firm intention to issue blanket free licenses covering any and all uses of the "protected" technology in open source software that is licensed under GPL Version 3 (and any compatible free software licenses). That can apparently be made perfectly legal, even in the greedy U.S., as IBM and Red Hat have done with a large pool of software patents they own. Bruno assures me he would not object to having his name on a patent licensed that way, and as he really discovered the Panini projection I think it should be there. It is important for this strategy that ownership of the basic patents stays in the hands of a reliable organization unlikely to be taken over by "patent trolls" (as Ipix and SCO so sadly were). Hence the foundation idea. But any seriously money-making application would almost certainly have to be covered by additional patents owned outright by a manufacturer (otherwise nobody would want to build it). For example let's say JVC decides to offer an ultra-wide angle video camera based on the Panini projection. They would absolutely want Canon et al not to be able to do the same, and would no doubt apply for several patents on the technology. The trick for keeping the software free is to have the "Panini foundation" be in a position to sell them an exclusive license for some key elements of the video processor, that is limited, say, to in-camera video processors and would not preclude licensing someone else to use the same technology for rendering movies in a post-production facility. Then JVC can patent the hell out of their camera without infringing the right of Hugin users to use panini-general. I'm sure the trick is doable, but it clearly needs both good legal preparation and good management of the patent rights. Which in turn need to be sustained by some revenue. So it won't happen unless I can actually find some customers who want to build and sell Panini-based products. If I were 20 years younger I'd probably try to start a company to make TV and movie rendering software (and probably lose my shirt) but as it is, someone else is going to have to do that. If any of you wants to volunteer, or knows how to sell new technology to TV or movie producers (or JVC Corporation, for that matter) I would be happy to hear about it. Regards, Tom -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
