<HTML dir=ltr><HEAD><TITLE>Re: [postgis-devel] Xing Lin's SoC project (raster support)</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=unicode">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3132" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText92425 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Xing,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>It might actually make sense to post this to the postgis users group as well even though it is a developer topic. I recall this was a hot topic in the postgis users group in December, and kind of died off around that time.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><A href="http://www.postgis.org/pipermail/postgis-users/2006-December/014068.html">http://www.postgis.org/pipermail/postgis-users/2006-December/014068.html</A></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>I think the poster of the document in question was probably Stephen Marshall given the note above. I'm not sure if he reads the dev listings though.</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>Hope that helps,</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>Regina</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><BR>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> postgis-devel-bounces@postgis.refractions.net on behalf of Tim Keitt<BR><B>Sent:</B> Fri 7/13/2007 11:43 AM<BR><B>To:</B> Xing Lin<BR><B>Cc:</B> PostGIS Development Discussion<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [postgis-devel] Xing Lin's SoC project (raster support)<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P><FONT size=2>Can anyone comment on whether there is any current effort to implement<BR>PGRaster as described in the wiki?<BR><BR>THK<BR><BR>On 7/13/07, Xing Lin <solo.lin@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>> I found a design documentation of PGRaster from the wiki of PostGIS, which<BR>> have a similar idea about PGRaster as a UDT.<BR>><BR>> <A href="http://postgis.com/support/wiki/index.php?PgRasterSqlInterface">http://postgis.com/support/wiki/index.php?PgRasterSqlInterface</A><BR>><BR>> Seem that somebody has already thought about it and might quite this UDT for<BR>> the same problem of Patent.<BR>><BR>> Xing<BR>><BR>><BR>> On 7/13/07, Tim Keitt < tkeitt@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>> > On 7/13/07, Tom Lane < tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:<BR>> > > "Tim Keitt" <tkeitt@gmail.com> writes:<BR>> > > > On 7/12/07, Xing Lin < solo.lin@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>> > > >> Could we just take a modified version from Oracle GeoRaster or we<BR>> can't take<BR>> > > >> anything even the idea of georaster model. But it is very common in<BR>> > > >> GeoScience and how could we avoid using it?<BR>> > ><BR>> > > > My understanding is that the patent covers the method of<BR>> > > > implementation, not the idea. You can use the same idea, but the<BR>> > > > implementation cannot be the same as described in the patent.<BR>> > ><BR>> > > No, it's much grimmer than that :-(. Patent law is exactly about<BR>> > > patenting *ideas* --- you may have confused it with copyright law,<BR>> > > which is about restricting specific expressions of an idea.<BR>> ><BR>> > Idea is too vague here -- I was referring to the concept that you<BR>> > cannot patent for example a mathematical equation, but you can patent<BR>> > a business process that employs the equation in the development of a<BR>> > product. If I'm not mistaken, one can work around patents by finding<BR>> > an independent method to achieve the same result (not by simply<BR>> > substituting different names for the same functions as I might have<BR>> > seemed to imply).<BR>> ><BR>> > ><BR>> > > To be sure you've steered clear of a patent, you have to be sure<BR>> > > you have not used any ideas described in the "claims" of the patent.<BR>> ><BR>> > But the "ideas" refer to processes or methods (at least in principle).<BR>> > You can't patent the idea of a mouse trap, only a method of trapping<BR>> > mice. Someone who builds a better mouse trap can patent their method.<BR>> ><BR>> > ><BR>> > > Now this game is rigged against you, because the normal structure of<BR>> > > patent claims is about like this:<BR>> > > 1. I claim the universe.<BR>> > > 2. I claim the Milky Way galaxy.<BR>> > > 3. I claim the moon, the sun and the stars.<BR>> > > 4. OK, I just claim the moon.<BR>> > > 5. I claim Tycho Crater.<BR>> > > and if the thing ever gets dragged to court, the judge will throw out<BR>> > > the first several claims and only allow the most specific ones that<BR>> > > clearly don't match any prior art. But if you aren't versed in<BR>> > > patent law and art, it's hard to tell just where the threshold of<BR>> > > silliness lies. And in any case it'll cost a lot to vindicate<BR>> > > your opinion in court.<BR>> > ><BR>> > > (Shouldn't the USPTO have rejected the overly-broad claims, you<BR>> > > ask? Well, if they weren't utterly dysfunctional they would have.)<BR>> ><BR>> > Yup.<BR>> ><BR>> > ><BR>> > > > I still agree though that the patent is probably overly broad and<BR>> > > > covers things that have been done many times in academia and<BR>> > > > elsewhere. The problem is that even if it is invalid owing to prior<BR>> > > > art, the cost of defending against a claim is prohibitive.<BR>> > ><BR>> > > Right, the real problem is in whether you are willing to bet $lots<BR>> > > that you can prevail against a patent troll.<BR>> ><BR>> > That's the rub.<BR>> ><BR>> > THK<BR>> ><BR>> > ><BR>> > > regards, tom lane<BR>> > > _______________________________________________<BR>> > > postgis-devel mailing list<BR>> > > postgis-devel@postgis.refractions.net<BR>> > ><BR>> <A href="http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel">http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel</A><BR>> > ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > --<BR>> > Timothy H. Keitt, University of Texas at Austin<BR>> > Contact info and schedule at <A href="http://www.keittlab.org/tkeitt/">http://www.keittlab.org/tkeitt/</A><BR>> > Reprints at <A href="http://www.keittlab.org/tkeitt/papers/">http://www.keittlab.org/tkeitt/papers/</A><BR>> > ODF attachment? See <A href="http://www.openoffice.org/">http://www.openoffice.org/</A><BR>> ><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> --<BR>> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>><BR>> Xing Lin<BR>> Geoinformatics<BR>> KTH - Royal Institute of Technology [Kungliga Tekniska högskolan]<BR>> SE-100 44 Stockholm<BR>> Sweden<BR>> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR><BR><BR>--<BR>Timothy H. Keitt, University of Texas at Austin<BR>Contact info and schedule at <A href="http://www.keittlab.org/tkeitt/">http://www.keittlab.org/tkeitt/</A><BR>Reprints at <A href="http://www.keittlab.org/tkeitt/papers/">http://www.keittlab.org/tkeitt/papers/</A><BR>ODF attachment? See <A href="http://www.openoffice.org/">http://www.openoffice.org/</A><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>postgis-devel mailing list<BR>postgis-devel@postgis.refractions.net<BR><A href="http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel">http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel</A><BR></FONT></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>
<HTML><BODY><P><hr size=1></P>
<P><STRONG>
The substance of this message, including any attachments, may be confidential, legally privileged and/or exempt from disclosure pursuant to Massachusetts law. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
</STRONG></P></BODY></HTML>