From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5F1A92B for ; Sun, 2 Oct 2016 17:27:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-qk0-f177.google.com (mail-qk0-f177.google.com [209.85.220.177]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1FFA1C3 for ; Sun, 2 Oct 2016 17:26:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qk0-f177.google.com with SMTP id j129so138763035qkd.1 for ; Sun, 02 Oct 2016 10:26:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=CDZKXzvQDJ6l9ea1LQPjt3LLDY1D5ZW33AGYTfe83Vw=; b=pLEjvIwGY3UXk+BIL9434rNGiXYhdU2jkPog6i05yNWPUpHqY7emCGcFSy2j8TU6XU 0j3SyaVrE/WkeiINi7WbnWJSw8w9RccpDJtaa/oCpnBpglL01YLSSZTlJ671by26EibL 2IR9byacWJYTV57Hau6g86xd79udI39r0rgPnoZ0RkI3vdObTxoSX2wyv/B0ahIswn/5 r4EjEIaozd35LPO2q2GoLJYz8CJ2/jJKZoVTAF0AztR2VkEXxkRtCm+85MPi6DcU7edz O1acJ9w9UIjPXjgYMsqsm/di7ss5zDP3ZKmbSbpwTztjl8jREDvnnBPaHTglZoADGCZX dIwA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CDZKXzvQDJ6l9ea1LQPjt3LLDY1D5ZW33AGYTfe83Vw=; b=Bx75KBEIbZnpS0SmTijMx2+GhPDKNu/pPExgcPpCzxMzc3vVh19qssg53kzRwQZWon ijf8JRVzcTz3Li2qpEJe1eCOJR9dImVuBJheChLunmVicESyu1Z746wo+fIRJBgEBCA3 uJVbBgizjl4D2qCwK4C2qw+ZyGu8sVojLa0r6hv/NmTcpPe1gNGsLC4zCPw9rZearYdk pny2zrvKetHEa52RfGHPr9kR7YLJ1grTMsyjGKiDn1TIwjYN9WbpEWmBdnyNurOk//8I gvwnNLgbsS+BYU6Mik0SUz1EXqNOWcXkap8E+rHvB8xJl1xSqWvI/4IUYztow7sTnTb0 Tbsw== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RnpxW0WGtTyzN3BNsqrrVCjPpHf6jv5fo3rQXFwJHO0Kwl3ENg773zmJ7wH/4/2T9FZ0OJ7BaXpQJqecA== X-Received: by 10.55.11.3 with SMTP id 3mr16476234qkl.256.1475429219250; Sun, 02 Oct 2016 10:26:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.237.35.7 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Oct 2016 10:26:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20161002171137.GA18452@fedora-21-dvm> References: <20161002161717.GA13915@fedora-21-dvm> <20161002171137.GA18452@fedora-21-dvm> From: Sergio Demian Lerner Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2016 14:26:18 -0300 Message-ID: To: Peter Todd Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114c8960813d62053de5224b X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Drivechain proposal using OP_COUNT_ACKS X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2016 17:27:00 -0000 --001a114c8960813d62053de5224b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I'm not a lawyer, and my knowledge on patents is limited. I guess RSK WILL endorse DPL or will make the required actions to make sure the things developed by RSK remain free and open. This was not a priority until now, but coding was. For me, coding always is the priority. I will discuss prioritizing this with the team. Remember it took several years to BlockStream to decide for DPL and not just publish everything as they were doing. I suppose the decision it was not a simple one, involving lawyers advise and all. I guess DPL needs to actually patent the things in order to open them later, and patenting has a very high cost. Give us time to decide which open source strategy is the best and cheaper for RSK. At this point I can assert that RSK has not filed any patent not is planing to. This proposal is not encumbered by any patents, and drivechains is actually not RSK's idea, but Paul Sztorc's. On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Peter Todd wrote: > On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 02:00:01PM -0300, Sergio Demian Lerner wrote: > > Peter, are you really going to try to down vote a decent free and > > open-source proposal that benefits all the Bitcoin community including > > you and your future children because a personal attack to me without any > > logic or basis? > > I've suggested a way that you can rectify this situation so we can > continue to > collaborate: Have Rootstock adopt a legally binding patent pledge/license. > I'd > suggest you do as Blockstream has done and at minimum adopt the Defensive > Patent License (DPL); I personally will be doing so in the next week or > two for > my own consulting company (I'm discussing exactly how to do so with my > lawyer > right now). > > If Rootstock is not planning on getting any patents for offensive purposes, > then there is no issue with doing so - the DPL in particular is designed > in a > minimally intrusive way. > > Please fix this issue so we can in fact continue to collaborate to improve > Bitcoin. > > -- > https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org > --001a114c8960813d62053de5224b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm not a lawyer, and my knowledge on patents is = limited. I guess RSK WILL endorse DPL or will make the required actions to = make sure the things developed by RSK remain free and open. This was not a = priority until now, but coding was. For me, coding always is the priority.<= br>
I will discuss prioritizing this with the team. Remember it took sev= eral years to BlockStream to decide for DPL and not just publish everything= as they were doing. I suppose the decision it was not a simple one, involv= ing lawyers advise and all. I guess DPL needs to actually patent the things= in order to open them later, and patenting has a very high cost.

Give us time to decide which open source strategy is the best and cheap= er for RSK. At this point I can assert that RSK has not filed any patent no= t is planing to.=C2=A0 This proposal is not encumbered by any patents, and = drivechains is actually not RSK's idea, but Paul Sztorc's.

<= div>

On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>= wrote:
On Sun, O= ct 02, 2016 at 02:00:01PM -0300, Sergio Demian Lerner wrote:
> Peter, are you really going to try to down vote a decent free and
> open-source proposal that benefits all the Bitcoin community including=
> you and your future children because a personal attack to me without a= ny
> logic or basis?

I've suggested a way that you can rectify this situation so we c= an continue to
collaborate: Have Rootstock adopt a legally binding patent pledge/license. = I'd
suggest you do as Blockstream has done and at minimum adopt the Defensive Patent License (DPL); I personally will be doing so in the next week or two= for
my own consulting company (I'm discussing exactly how to do so with my = lawyer
right now).

If Rootstock is not planning on getting any patents for offensive purposes,=
then there is no issue with doing so - the DPL in particular is designed in= a
minimally intrusive way.

Please fix this issue so we can in fact continue to collaborate to improve<= br> Bitcoin.

--
http= s://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org

--001a114c8960813d62053de5224b--