 Hello, can you hear me? Yes, okay. My name is Kevin. I work for Open Invention Network to promote pattern integration for Linux and actually before the job I work for Conco to promote Ubuntu services about eight years. So since that in that eight years, I've been experiencing a lot of Talking discussion with the lawyer between two lawyers like customer lawyer and our lawyer. So it's kind of To me it's kind of difficult job cost spent about 30% of time but in between two lawyers at the end I think lawyer actually decide if we can do the job or not do the project. So Yesterday we heard about four freedom of to use open source to run to study to redistribute and to improve but how and who to Protect the freedom is a license, right? So License to protect the the full freedoms Actually what they are about 80 different licenses OSI approved license and To protect our freedom in very different way If you are very copy left the people you might want to use a GPR GPR or GPR or if you are very open mind MIT, DSP or Apache or something in between So there are many way to Contribute your work and so I would suggest any developer if you really like to use open source You should read the license before you use the code. Otherwise at the end you might end up something you don't like so here we talk about license and I guess Most of people know a bit of license, but where is the patent in here So a pattern is a set of exclusive right as Dawson said and granted to a specific person in a specific time In the detail publication. So at the beginning of the pattern is a good thinking, right? So I've something very good and then I write it down and then share to other people But in a certain time I can get a specific right However, since I think at this stage pattern becomes something like you fire pattern. I fire pattern and then we fight So for here is one example. Okay. I work for Canonical So I knew it's a bit about Ubuntu. So Ubuntu announced they have a kind of Ubuntu edge So you can use your your phone connect to your screen that you can Have a big screen because Ubuntu edge they published in 2013 last year Microsoft did the same thing very similar Microsoft continued 2015 and then Since Microsoft DERF Linux they fire pattern So they fire pattern that For detail if you're interested. Anyway, it's from the phone and they can eject to the screen to a big screen So let's explain of although you have something already public but some someone might still fire pattern and So to answer someone a question in previously, how is that possible? So For BSD MIT The the entire license does not even mention any word about pattern Which means well, we cannot only that I think we cannot blend then blend the right because that will 20 30 years ago They don't exactly know What what lessons will go right? So they do they do their best For GPO V2 and GPO V2 and it's not very clear. Well, they have a patent clause, but not not Not good enough to protect people on the pattern for a new license from G from a patch V2 GPO V3 a GPO V3 is content how they grant patent and how they retrieve patent back So it's much much much more ready But it still cannot protect like for example, if You are a developer. I mean, I mean open source developer. I am not I might I Might have some good idea. I already fire pattern But you didn't know and then you just open your source that might against my pattern, right? So how is that? That's still an issue So we I can show you the I can show you the patent clause in close in MIT if you can read it's very short if Confine if I found find the pet Nothing there. Okay. Nothing there in MIT in a patch. Well, no give me a second in GPO V2 Yes, there are some but not You can see a structure is not very precise and then if you see GPO V3 They have an in time. Give me a second. They have an entire session talking about pattern how to grant to the developer how to protect user so to me GPO V3 is the more about the primary change between GPO V2 and V3 is Patent and entity ball. So that's if you know license, you know So the the new license is much ready and to protect user to use Though to use a software if if some pattern behind the software but how about but Let's see that problem is still there because a lot of history is just not easy to change Let's use here so This data I got from a black box. They scan all not all but many many open source and to get their licenses So right now it's still 25% is on GPO V2 and MIT is about 19% BSD 7% GPO V Lgpl is 5% so summary of that the total of the License that not cover pattern where about more than 50% And which is not easy to to to remove because most of the GPO V2 Most of software related to hardware layer is about GPO V2 So it's not easy to change it to GPO V3 because that's That's that's just where they are So that's That's why we think they might be something that from one point of view this something we can do to improve or to prevent the pattern wall So this is where we are Okay, our company actually for fun data by IBM Google and she flips right head so sir and Sony So everyone has a I guess I think everyone has a similar issue I Like company like IBM Google and she they have a long history in developing Very fundamental technology. They own the pattern But can you imagine if IBM come to sue you that you use Linux about it their pattern? They can't I cause their IBM How about Google can Google come through to you you use their patent on Linux? Probably not right. I don't think they those big company They will do but those pattern is there The only thing they can do is defense Once if they want to defense their self they wouldn't they will want to enlarge the defense coverage so we Come together and to start to work. So our idea is It's not Well, some people don't like a pattern Our idea is pattern is already there is that the whole the old regulation the old law is already there It's not thing we can change but if fundamental on the fundamental linear system if we can work together that The fund the base will be very secure and safe and then on top of that People can still develop a US open source solution or closer source solution and you can compete and make things better That's our that's our philosophy And so all in now we have about two thousand members join and Everyone join on it's actually free free to join for everyone and So the only thing you need to agree is you cannot assert pattern to against the members the cost all the member all the less and see all they also bring you the The pattern right so it's a kind of cross-licensing. That's the only thing we we ask so you don't see each other and Also, you are free to use or and About one thousand patterns those pattern read on e-commerce and security cloud mobility and everything So that's that's our idea So if every everyone can agree together that don't switch other so the pattern on in us will no longer be an issue So here we're about two thousand licensee run right now, but it's here It's more about open source project open source ERP BP X database Web-based solution and like belcher and Twitter for these are everyone all agree from the enterprise side We have a phone and future telco and car maker and networking provider and and then it's cloud and then it's a tremendous So we are trying to ask everyone to join our ecosystem. So in addition to that we also publish a lot of Apply art to answer some question in a previous session how we do that we have a The web page and then you can see the defensive publication. So I give you one example, right? So here is about 250 pre art publication already did The specific one like this one is for safe It's actually that's a that's a PhD That's a sage when when he did a PhD study in in In his early life. So this is his study So we what we did is kind of honest simple not simple We convert his publication into prior art, which is much easier for lawyer because a lot of Research public publication is easy for research people but not easy for for lawyer So we do that after we do that. We also work with IP dot com To put all the publication in IP dot com and IP dot com is the database which a lot of you US Oh pattern examiner they will search your they will search the database if the if some prior art is already there and When they examine the pattern pattern application So we all do together and so if some open source developer You have a good idea that you don't want to file pattern, but you are kind of concerned some company will file pattern based on your technology and You can work with us. So we can help you to write the Prior art and which a lawyer can understand. I think that's Most of the thing I will talk. Okay. That's about my talk any question so it seems like these solutions still are kind of like we should issue a destruction You know like the concept or depends on Having parents that scares the other ones off from like ever dropping out of this Yeah Isn't that sort of like I didn't need to more never get actually building down This this arsenal of weapons that we have How can we ever get to a situation where? No, it has no longer exist on software It's not anything Because it's really only a previous week was saying in certain jurisdictions that this is the wrong Right like in India and other places. It's not a case. Yeah, a lot of country. They start with the thing and Software should not be patent-less in DIC. For example, New Zealand some several states in the United They also have the same but that take time to change government one by one All right, so that's it could be an intermediate solution before that stage Shouldn't you see this as sort of like a step in like cementing that system because you're getting like all these companies and all these huge organizations at the time I mean some friends have been in a known problem for decades. Yeah, so I mean takes a lot of time But like one that's been a lot of time So is there also Like building down maybe if I can add one comment here This is not going to be a permanent thing because the patents have a lifetime So once it's got 17 or 20 a lifetime. So even though In those companies or whoever is a member and they have placed their stuff There is an expiry at any rate at which point doesn't matter So I think when more countries and when jurisdiction starts Stop issuing But let's take time maybe next 20 years Thank you Mm-hmm Okay, our coverage is only on Linux system, we have a well-defined tool right now in 2335 packages as long as the your pattern really on the packages that were applied So we will need to see if your pattern read on the package or not Yeah, so if there's some others like user space pattern Probably not yeah, because that's how that's where company will compete and which is not easy to escalate to cross lessons Yes Something and like trying to really like hadn't stuff that comes out of open source community With the help of like a really independent institution that just has like one interest and then getting a pile of like IP that you can actually use to Yeah, to protect yourself against like Okay So far free software foundation and software freedom low center They are more folk their primary strengths is on copyright So we actually work together if there is some copyright issue or we will work together with them If there's a pattern issue, they will forward to us and then at the back end We we actually work together with Lena's foundation free software foundation is software free than those in order to get it But it's a good idea if you want to build your own defensive pool I mean lots of companies do that like you look at the you know, I'll just read that for example It's a promise that was made in 99 and it's a good thing to do They build their own portfolio. They probably have a thousand pounds 800 pounds, whatever it is And they're pretty focused on what they file and anybody they pledge that anything that you as long as you behave Well, you can use a balance I think that's a that's a good model You know a lot of pledges are complimentary to what I am does they're complimentary to any other Activity that you can become involved in the community you know, so I think there's there's an evolution of thinking and Around how projects are managed how they should be spun up and how the election property Particularly happening should play play a part so that you don't have mischief Because we're getting to a point where people are gonna start misbehaving. We've been monitoring projects like like open-stack Because open-stack to me is it's only done under the patchy license The patchy license has a contributor provision around Around patents it's not particularly Fulsome And I think everyone who's you know got involved in open-stack and organized it from the rack space people on down Recognize that it was kind of a band-aid And more is going to be necessary because what we're concerned about is people inventing because they deliver on it on a platter To you because the way that project is organized. What's core every six months? They'll introduce a new release of core technology if you file patents on core technology You you sit around for five or six years Everybody in the project is standardized in terms of the cloud of the future on ticket that particular core technology to build their Their functionality and products you basically setting up a total and so what we're doing is try to identify Those patents and then going after them to reduce their claim scope or get them to be rejected if their applications They're already granted get them to be invalidated under IPR. So that's something we do on them, you know quietly Because we want to make sure that people aren't gaining the system and that the what I consider to be a non-uniform level of authenticity about companies of dismayed open-source the Not manifest itself in a hold up Down the road Yes That's different law License pattern and the trim up if you if you see this three law actually guide the software And this is where Richard Stowman The confusion of the phrase intellectual property because when someone says I have some IP or unconsolable Exactly which part of it? Yeah, are you talking about copyright and talking about patents? I'm talking about trademarks Which one are you talking about because you have to know which one it is So I always whenever anybody talks about intellectual property. I think you know what I have no idea The specific thing are you we're talking about has to be absolutely clear, but it's good. I mean part of Richard's Focus he has to be a very clear about everything he's talking about. That's why when I say open He never likes you know if I don't say false if I don't say Great, the new Linux versus the Linux and be very clear about what each does every time I describe it He gets a little It's good he's correct. I mean being precise is a very good thing. All right. Okay. Thank you