[asterisk-users] Software patents (was G723 on asterisk 1.4.1)

[Atis Lezdins]

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 10:12 AM, Steve Underwood <steveu at coppice.org> wrote:
> Atis Lezdins wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 6:34 AM, Andrew Joakimsen <joakimsen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Tilghman Lesher
>>> <tilghman at mail.jeffandtilghman.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It is completely illegal in any country that recognizes patents.
>>>>
>>> You mean countries that recognize software patents, right?
>>>
>>
>> As resident of country where the file is hosted - yes we don't have
>> software patents, they have been proposed to EU and reject few years
>> ago. So by law - software is algorithm and can't be patented.
>>
>> In local laws we even are allowed to reverse-engineer software for
>> needs of compatibility and interoperability. So, writing code for
>> commercial codec and using it for interoperability with hardware
>> devices (you purchased) is allowed by law.
>>
>> Damn, we even have a law that don't allow bittorrent trackers, as
>> bittorrent file is considered breaking copyright law.. Ironic :p
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> Please do NOT discuss ways to use unlicensed codecs on this list or any other forum
>>>> provided by Digium.  This has been discussed multiple times as to why not,
>>>> and I don't feel like rehashing the argument again.
>>>>
>>> I did not know you were a moderator on this list.
>>>
>>>
>>>> contributory infringement
>>>>
>>> What if  I make a page that explains the patent issues and then
>>> provide a link to http://asterisk.hosting.lv/ from that site and only
>>> provide people on this list a link to my site? What if I provide a
>>> link to the Google search for "asterisk g723?" Where do we draw the
>>> line? If that site is so illegal, why hasn't it been taken down? Why
>>> hasn't the patent holder at the very least provided Google with a DMCA
>>> notice?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I guess because it's completely legal here, and there's a disclaimer on page:
>> DISCLAIMER: You might have to pay royalty fees to the G.729/723.1
>> patent holders for using their algorithm.
>>
>> It all depends on country and laws.
>>
> There are a few algorithmic speedup patents around, what can accelerate
> codecs like G.729 and G.723.1, and which are purely software patents.
> Most of the relevant patents are *not* software patents. Don't confuse
> "software patent" with "something running on a computer".
>
> Patents applicable to speech coding are perfectly valid in the vast
> majority of countries. Certainly in all the EU countries.

It seems that this have been discussed numerous times.

http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/2004-October/058136.html

Does anybody have some more legal experence with this? Any courts?
Negotiations? NDA? :p