Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 13 Aug 2002 13:43:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 13 Aug 2002 13:43:12 -0400 Received: from leibniz.math.psu.edu ([146.186.130.2]:5048 "EHLO math.psu.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 13 Aug 2002 13:41:49 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 13:45:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Alexander Viro To: Rik van Riel cc: Linus Torvalds , Rob Landley , Alan Cox , Daniel Phillips , Larry McVoy , frankeh@watson.ibm.com, davidm@hpl.hp.com, David Mosberger , "David S. Miller" , gh@us.ibm.com, Martin.Bligh@us.ibm.com, William Lee Irwin III , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: large page patch (fwd) (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 943 Lines: 25 On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Rik van Riel wrote: > Suppose somebody sends you a patch which implements a nice > algorithm that just happens to be patented by that same > somebody. You don't know about the patent. > > You integrate the patch into the kernel and distribute it, > one year later you get sued by the original contributor of > that patch because you distribute code that is patented by > that person. > > Not having some protection in the license could open you > up to sneaky after-the-fact problems. Accepting non-trivial patches from malicious source means running code from malicious source on your boxen. In kernel mode. And in that case patents are the least of your troubles... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/