hadoop-common-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Graham <billgra...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Google has obtained the patent over mapreduce
Date Thu, 21 Jan 2010 01:45:10 GMT
Typically companies will patent their IP as a defensive measure to protect
themselves from being sued, as has been pointed out already.  Another
typical reason is to exercise the patent against companies that present a
challenge to their core business.

I would bet that unless you're making a noticeable dent in google's
search/ad business, then you really don't need to worry about them enforcing
the patent against you.


On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Colin Freas <colinfreas@gmail.com> wrote:

> Developers do themselves, their code, and their users a disservice if they
> lack some understanding of intellectual property law.  It can be
> complicated, but it isn't rocket science.
>
> In the United States, Google is protected by the "first to
> invent<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_to_file_and_first_to_invent>"
> principle: they can safely publish anything they want about their invention
> prior to applying for a patent if they can prove they came up with the
> invention first.
>
> As others have pointed out, it isn't something to panic over.  This is
> Google, not Rambus.  It would be nice to see Google proactively and
> explicitly say "We're not going to enforce this patent."
>
> But this patent and a lot of other software and business process patents
> could be in danger of being summarily overturned, depending on how the US
> Supreme Court rules in the Bilski case.  It's possible they wanted to
> acquire this patent before that ruling, since it would give them standing
> to
> challenge a lot of potentially unfavorable outcomes.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 4:07 PM, brien colwell <xcolwell@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> Personally, it
> > seems like they gave away too much information before they had the
> > patent.
> >
> > I'm not a patent lawyer, but I'd expect they submitted the patent
> > application or a provisional before they submitted their academic paper
> or
> > other public disclosure.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Edward Capriolo <edlinuxguru@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Interesting situation.
> > >
> > > I try to compare mapreduce to the camera. Let argue Google is Kodak,
> > > Apache is Polaroid, and MapReduce is a Camera. Imagine Kodak invented
> > > the camera privately, never sold it to anyone, but produced some
> > > document describing what a camera did.
> > >
> > > Polaroid followed the document and produced a camera and sold it
> > > publicly. Kodak later patents a camera, even though no one outside of
> > > Kodak can confirm Kodak ever made a camera before Polaroid.
> > >
> > > Not saying that is what happened here, but google releasing the GFS
> > > pdf was a large factor in causing hadoop to happen. Personally, it
> > > seems like they gave away too much information before they had the
> > > patent.
> > >
> > > The patent system faces many problems including this 'back to the
> > > future' issue. Where it takes so long to get a patent no one can wait,
> > > by the time a patent is issued there are already multiple viable
> > > implementations of a patent.
> > >
> > > I am no patent layer or anything, but I notice the phrase "master
> > > process" all over the claims. Maybe if a piece of software (hadoop)
> > > had a "distributed process" that would be sufficient to say hadoop
> > > technology does not infringe on this patent.
> > >
> > > I think it would be interesting to look deeply at each claim and
> > > determine if hadoop could be designed to not infringe on these
> > > patents, to deal with what if scenarios.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Ravi <ravindra.babu.ravula@gmail.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >  I too read about that news. I don't think that it will be any
> problem.
> > > > However Google didn't invent the model.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Udaya Lakshmi <udaya603@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>   As an user of hadoop, Is there anything to worry about Google
> > > obtaining
> > > >> the patent over mapreduce?
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message