From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11949 invoked by alias); 2 Jun 2008 14:39:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 11934 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Jun 2008 14:39:51 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from VLSI1.ULTRA.NYU.EDU (HELO vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu) (128.122.140.213) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with SMTP; Mon, 02 Jun 2008 14:39:24 +0000 Received: by vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (4.1/1.34) id AA23391; Mon, 2 Jun 08 10:42:43 EDT From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) Message-Id: <10806021442.AA23391@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 14:39:00 -0000 To: dberlin@dberlin.org Subject: Re: Wolfe patent on "assert chains" Cc: dewar@adacore.com, dnovillo@google.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, stevenb.gcc@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <4aca3dc20806020722x4cac010bk5f467aad3b596ea3@mail.gmail.com> References: <571f6b510806020149s21f17e75j1c591e13167def65@mail.gmail.com> <4843F242.3020908@adacore.com> <4aca3dc20806020647n62274463l8b46734f34de0dba@mail.gmail.com> <4aca3dc20806020649p77dddd0ct8425bb854e360893@mail.gmail.com> <10806021409.AA22979@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <4aca3dc20806020722x4cac010bk5f467aad3b596ea3@mail.gmail.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-06/txt/msg00014.txt.bz2 > IE they don't care whether it i printed, and don't care whether it i a > publication, they care whether it is accessible to the public and has > been disseminated to the public. Right. That's exactly what I meant. They are saying that "printed" vs "electronic" doesn't matter. However, the issue here isn't whether it matters if the GCC sources were printed in a book someplace or just available electronically. The issue that Robert was raising is not the "printed" part, but the "publication" part. Specifically, if source code could be considered a "publication". Reading the reference you gave makes it sound like they're using the term "publication" interchangably with "technical paper" in that they're talking about online references and databases. Nothing in that document (I didn't go to the referenced cases) seems on point to the issue of whether source code is a "publication".