From Luuk.van.Dijk@xs4all.nl  Wed Mar 28 17:55:54 2001
From: Luuk.van.Dijk@xs4all.nl (Luuk van Dijk)
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 18:55:54 +0200
Subject: [Patents] Fwd: Patent problem
In-Reply-To: <20010328124401.A30988@morgana.systemy.it>; from rubini@gnu.org on Wed, Mar 28, 2001 at 12:44:01 +0200
References: <20010328124401.A30988@morgana.systemy.it>
Message-ID: <20010328185554.D373@wonder>

On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 12:44:01 Alessandro Rubini wrote:
> 
> I received this, I though it's of interest here.
> 
> > From: Juhana Sadeharju <kouhia@nic.funet.fi>
> > Subject: Patent problem
> > Date: 	Mon, 26 Mar 2001 14:23:24 +0300
> > 
> > Hello. We have a problem.

<SNIP>

> > Would you have a possibility to find people who are interested in
> > to read the prior art papers and the patents, and give comments?
> > The story is at "http://www.funet.fi/~kouhia/convolver.html".

On that page is a link to the alleged infringers page on the 
program in question (http://www.ludd.luth.se/~torger/brutefir.html)
and it says:


<QUOTE>
2001-03-17
With the help of people that know much more about patents than I do, I have realised that my software has never infringed Lake's patent. Their patent is about hybrid filtering and nonuniform partitioning of the impulse response, and not about the trivial algorithm found in BruteFIR. And if you ask, yes, all this is embarrassing. However, as before, in respect to Lake I will not republish the source code until they have reported to me that they have understood the situation.
</QUOTE>

So I'm not sure what the status of the cry for help is now.

Luuk




