couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Truemper <>
Subject Re: Map/Reduce patent granted
Date Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:19:06 GMT

see also Doug Cutting's comment in the Mahout project [1]:

> > you or any other apache guy are NOT qualified to judge if a patent applies
> +1, nor whether its owner objects to your use of any patent.
> I would generally discourage folks from doing patent research when implementing Apache
code. It is usually both a waste of time and dangerous, since it opens you to the possibility
of treble damages. In particular, if you are involved in patching this issue, please do not
read the above cited patent.
> A patent holder may tell us if they believe we have infringed their patents. We should
generally wait for that event, and not pro-actively seek permission.

The Hadoop people probably don't care as well [2]. There is IBM and Yahoo and many others
using it that have the money for other suits to oppose this patent. If there were a case I
doubt the patent would withstand the fact that map and reduce are around for some time now
and that this really is nothing new...



Am 20.01.2010 um 14:55 schrieb David Coallier:

> 2010/1/20 Paul Davis <>:
>> I'm not concerned. Our implementation isn't really like Google's.
>> Single M/R invocations don't get spawned across multiple hosts or have
>> automatic restart when nodes fail which is suggested as the crux of
>> their patent. They cite implementations for working with large data
>> sets that don't have those features as prior art. Not that I spent
>> three years of my life in law school...
> Good to hear, I could hear the suits getting animated here.
> -- 
> Slan,
> David

View raw message