Let me just emphasis one distinction that appears not to have been appreciated. Patents are not issued for algorithms but only the implementation of them, in an invention or process. The effect of this is quite limiting and specific. You could still implement the same algorithm for a different purpose. Arguably, when the form changes so too does the purpose. So far this discussion seems to doing little to qualify the difference between a mere possibility and a probability. It is a possibility that IBM could target Hercules but not aprobability, and even then, if it were, I don't see the claim being successful as even a possibility.
What I see as likely is that the reason for behind generating a discussion like this is to create ill will towards IBM, by arousing undue suspicions. Regards, Craig +61-2-9354-7283 tel +61-2-9354-7797 fax Craig Vernon B.App.Sc. LL.B. IBM Support Centre FB41 55 Coonara Ave West Pennant Hills 2125 Sydney NSW Australia Visit us at http://www.ibm.com/services/au/its "You can not find a solution using the same thinking that created the problem." - Albert EInstein If received in error please delete and notify the sender immediately. No other use permitted. Neither confidentiality, privilege nor copyright waived. Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] u.org.uk> cc: Sent by: Linux on Subject: Re: Hi there... 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED] IST.EDU> 16/04/2002 07:38 PM Please respond to Linux on 390 Port > now becoming quite serious in the EMC/Hitachi case. The fatc that Hercules' > implementation of these features is in software and not in hardware brings > a fascinating aspect to bear. Patents on software algorithms apply only in a tiny number of nations. At worst Hercules would join the vast list of software, hardware and methods of work that are allowed everywhere in the world but the USA. And people wonder why so many companies are pulling out of the USA, or moving their engineering operations elsewhere.. Alan
