[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AE5ED98.8090500@icculus.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:42:32 -0400
From: "Ryan C. Gordon" <icculus@...ulus.org>
To: Rayson Ho <raysonlogin@...il.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: FatELF & patents
> However, there are 20 claims in the patent. Just using a different way
> to store the architecture independent header might not be enough.
I'm not a lawyer, so I don't have anything to add to this except that
FatELF has a few fields that Apple's format doesn't, so the flow chart
they specify isn't the same. I don't really know enough about how
patents work.
Any lawyers around that can comment on this? Is this something to be
concerned with (and if so, what sort of changes would make FatELF not
violate the patent), or is this all just business as usual?
--ryan.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists