July 13th, 2007
Monkcast #9: With 11g, Oracle still dodging open source bullet & a patenting software debate
Hard to believe we’re at Monkcast #9 already. Time is flying. This week, the majority of the podcast focused on four issues. First, we talked a bit about 11g; the lastest and newest version of Oracle’s namesake database (announced this week). That led to a discussion of how Oracle has managed to dodge the open source bullet and whether open source software can solve the really hard problems (the really hard problem I cited was synchronization) . Or, do you need the resources of a commercial enterprise like database makers Oracle, IBM, Microsoft, and Sybase to do that.
Then, we switched gears to talk about IBM’s latest patent convenant (yes, another one). According to Paul Krill:
Under a pledge issued by the company Wednesday, IBM is granting universal and perpetual access to intellectual property that might be necessary to implement standards designed to make software interoperable. IBM will not assert any patent rights to its technologies featured in these standards. The company believes its move in this space is the largest of its kind…..Among the technologies included on IBM’s list, accessible here, are various standards pertaining to SOAP, SAML, XML Schema, and Service Component Architecture. WS-* specifications are featured as well.
And that led us to the discussion of whether software should be patentable. People get confused about the issue of open source and software patents. So, as a reminder, when software gets patented, it’s usually the business process that the software represents that’s really getting patented. For example, Amazon has a patent on one-click buying. If some open source developer published some one-click buying source code under an open source license that was completely his or her own code (in other words, the code wasn’t Amazon’s code), neither he (or she) nor the code would be safe from Amazon’s lawyers. Source code is about copyrights (OK, I know the GPL3 attempts to deal with patents too). But the point is that when someone has a patent on the business process, it doesn’t matter what the code is. It could be your code. My code. Commercially developed code. Open source code. If that code “reads” on the business process patent, then it’s probably infringing and the patent holder has a rigth to go after you.
Personally speaking, I don’t think business process should be patentable. Next question: what is business process (we cover that too!).
