3 ms·
Because Samsung is shipping a device with the software. Parent law does require that the patent be tied to a physical device. IANAL.
by azakai 14y ago
Because Samsung is shipping a device with the software. Parent law does require that the patent be tied to a physical device. IANAL.
- jrockway 14y agoIndeed. Source code is speech, and speech cannot infringe patents. (Not saying this is logical, that's just what the case law says.) That's why you can build an mp3 player from source without paying the license fee, but Debian can't ship you a compiled mp3 player.
- ConstantineXVI 14y agoSo if shipping source only is perfectly legal, what's to stop OEMs from simply shipping infringing components as source only and compiling on first boot? Strictly speaking, the user initiated the compile (by powering on the device), so Samsung would be in the clear. Technically legal, but I have the feeling this wouldn't survive court.
- chimeracoder 14y ago> Indeed. Source code is speech, and speech cannot infringe patents. (Not saying this is logical, that's just what the case law says.) Are you sure about this? So I could write any patent-infringing code I want, distribute source-only (or even write it in a purely interpreted language) and then nobody can complain that I've violated any of their patents?