Red Hat Seeks Limits on Software Patents

eldavojohn writes "RedHat went to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals asking for limits on software patents yesterday. They have not uploaded their full brief yet online, but promise to post it soon. Here's a tidbit: 'Given the litigation risk, some open source companies, including Red Hat, acquire patents for the sole purpose of asserting them defensively in the event they are faced with a future lawsuit. Red Hat also provides open source intellectual property protections through our Open Source Assurance Program that protects our customers and encourages them to deploy with confidence. Our strategy is a prudent one and mitigates the risk of patent lawsuits, but it would be unnecessary if the system itself were fixed.'"

Sudden, yet expected, outbreak

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd tag this as "suddenoutbreakofcommonsense", but given the source, something tells me this isn't exactly unexpected or sudden. So, keep up the good work, ya red fedora-wearing nuts!

(assuming, of course, this actually GOES anywhere...)

BONK!

[Anonymous Coward]

The article managed to spell "Red Hat" correctly almost 20 times, and the summary couldn't manage it once.

Re:Honestly

[arotenbe]

Name one category of software that would not have been developed without patents and name a few specific products.

Annoying interactive cartoon interfaces. Microsoft Bob. Clippit.

Oh, wait...

Re:Honestly

[Gat0r30y]

Link to the brief [redhat.com] It was at the bottom of the page.
As for my .02$ I think you should be able to patent compilers, anything else should fall under copyright.

Re:Patents

[Max Littlemore]

And you're going to use 25-year-old stories to conclude about present-day ambitions, goals, and methodologies?

Yep.

That's why I buy Microsoft products. I'll support anyone who sticks it to the big, evil, nasty IBM.