ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Difference between revisions of "Apple Inc."

(small changes)
m (restore the external links section I deleted by accident)
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 30: Line 30:
 
* [[Nortel and Rockstar Bidco]]
 
* [[Nortel and Rockstar Bidco]]
  
−
==The LLVM compiler==
+
==Speculation about LLVM==
  
−
There are no known granted patents, owned by Apple, which would be needed for someone to make a clone of LLVM.
+
There are no known granted patents, owned by Apple, which would be needed for someone to make a clone of the LLVM compiler.
  
−
Apple is a major contributor to the LLVM compiler.  The LLVM software is [[free software]], distributed under a standard BSD [[Patent clauses in software licences|licence]], which happens to give no patent protection to recipients. It is no different in this regard than any other BSD-licensed body of code.
+
Apple is a major contributor to LLVM.  LLVM is [[free software]], distributed under an X11-style permissive [[Patent clauses in software licences|licence]].  This is a common type of licence, containing no explicit patent protection for recipients of the software.
  
−
{{help|LLVM's contributor policy[http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#patents] asks contributors to give free access to necessary patents.  Has Apple done this?  Reminder: IF Apple is found to have been granted patents on LLVM ideas, we should check if those ideas are implemented in LLVM's repository (covered by LLVM's patent policy) or if they're for non-contributed extensions.}}
+
{{help|LLVM's contributor policy[http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#patents] asks contributors to give free access to necessary patents.  Has Apple done this?  Reminder: ''If'' Apple is found to have been granted patents on LLVM ideas, we should check if those ideas are implemented in LLVM's repository (covered by LLVM's patent policy) or if they're for non-contributed extensions.}}
  
 
Apple has applied for a patent on "''Converting javascript into a device-independent representation''" which claims:<ref>http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20100153929</ref>
 
Apple has applied for a patent on "''Converting javascript into a device-independent representation''" which claims:<ref>http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20100153929</ref>
Line 43: Line 43:
 
1. A method for processing computer code, comprising: storing a device-independent intermediate representation of a source code; and in the event an indication is received that the source code has changed, using the changed source code to generate and store a new intermediate representation of the changed source code.<br />
 
1. A method for processing computer code, comprising: storing a device-independent intermediate representation of a source code; and in the event an indication is received that the source code has changed, using the changed source code to generate and store a new intermediate representation of the changed source code.<br />
 
[...]<br />
 
[...]<br />
−
8. A method as recited in claim 1, wherein the intermediate representation comprises LLVM intermediate representation (IR), LLVM byte code or other byte code, or another appropriate intermediate representation.
+
8. A method as recited in claim 1, wherein the intermediate representation comprises LLVM intermediate representation (IR), LLVM byte code or other byte code, or another appropriate intermediate representation.  
 
</blockquote>
 
</blockquote>
  
−
"LLVM IR" is also mentioned in the application's "Detailed description" but only in passing, and solely as an example—one of potentially many—of "intermediate representations" which could be used here. The specific mention, at [0016] in the application, reads "Converting code written in an interpreted language, such as JavaScript, into an intermediate representation, ''such as LLVM intermediate representation '''or another storable intermediate representation''''', is disclosed." There's nothing to support the notion that this patent related specifically to LLVM in general, or even to LLVM IR in particular, in any way. LLVM IR is obviously mentioned simply as one example that could be given.
+
"LLVM IR" is also mentioned in the application's "Detailed description" but only as an example. The specific mention, at [0016] in the application, reads:
  
−
A few suggestions, pretty much randomly selected, for so-called [[prior art]] which ''might'' actually relate to the LVM compiler as a whole, if Apple should ever actually attempt to patent it—something which seems completely incomprehensible given that there is, in fact, no apparent evidence to support such an idea—''and'' if such an application were unaccountably approved, might ''possibly'' include  [http://markmail.org/message/uhb7zl6673dja5vl], [http://ajaxian.com/archives/llvm-and-running-c-as-well-as-python-in-the-browser], [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1420908/what-is-the-reason-for-the-creation-of-llvm], and the "UCSD p-System".
+
<blockquote>
 +
Converting code written in an interpreted language, such as JavaScript, into an intermediate representation, such as LLVM intermediate representation or another storable intermediate representation, is disclosed.
 +
</blockquote>
 +
 
 +
===Prior art babble===
 +
 
 +
There are no accusations or threats of litigation, so no one is in need of [[prior art]]. Still, some people have discussed it for hypothetical situations. Suggestions can be briefly noted here.
  
−
This is ''entirely'' speculative, however, in the actual absence of such a patent. You can't know what's "prior art" unless you have some concrete and specific "art" that the "prior art" is supposed to be prior ''to''. The particular "prior art" cited here appear to have no relevance at all to the patent application being discussed in this section, so their inclusion here essentially amounts to a random waste of otherwise perfectly good pixels. We'll do it anyway, what the hell.
+
* [http://markmail.org/message/uhb7zl6673dja5vl]
 +
* [http://ajaxian.com/archives/llvm-and-running-c-as-well-as-python-in-the-browser]
 +
* [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1420908/what-is-the-reason-for-the-creation-of-llvm], and the "UCSD p-System".
 +
 
 +
But keep in mind that prior art has to predate a specific patent, and has to accurately describe the specific idea allegedly infringed by the attacked software.  Since there's no litigation, and thus no specific patent or specific piece of software, this discussion is just a collection of very general starting points.
  
 
===Patents using "LLVM" but referring to something else===
 
===Patents using "LLVM" but referring to something else===
  
−
Some of Apple's patents use the abbreviation "LLVM" to refer to other things, such as "low-level virtual memory", as used in a patent US 6263421, titled [http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6263421/claims.html Virtual memory system that is portable between different CPU types]. The easily bewildered and those already antagonistic to Apple may unwittingly make the gross error of assuming that this particular patent has something, ''anything'', to do with the LLVM compiler, but that is most certainly not the case. It is mentioned here only as a possible remedy to anyone who might be prone to this sort of appalling credulity.
+
Some of Apple's patents use the abbreviation "LLVM" to refer to other things, such as "low-level virtual memory", as used in US&nbsp;6263421, titled [http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6263421/claims.html Virtual memory system that is portable between different CPU types].
 +
 
 +
Confusing this LLVM with the compiler named LLVM would be a silly mistake which should be avoided.
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==

Revision as of 19:56, 29 December 2011

Apple inc. has software patents and has used them aggressively (see Litigation By Apple).

Blocking World Wide Web standards

The w3c is the consortium which develops standards for the World Wide Web.

Litigation

(Note: be careful to add only disputes about software patents, not hardware patents.)

Court cases and lawsuits involving Apple...

By Apple

Against Apple

Related pages on ESP Wiki

Speculation about LLVM

There are no known granted patents, owned by Apple, which would be needed for someone to make a clone of the LLVM compiler.

Apple is a major contributor to LLVM. LLVM is free software, distributed under an X11-style permissive licence. This is a common type of licence, containing no explicit patent protection for recipients of the software.

Can you help? LLVM's contributor policy[1] asks contributors to give free access to necessary patents. Has Apple done this? Reminder: If Apple is found to have been granted patents on LLVM ideas, we should check if those ideas are implemented in LLVM's repository (covered by LLVM's patent policy) or if they're for non-contributed extensions.


Apple has applied for a patent on "Converting javascript into a device-independent representation" which claims:[3]

1. A method for processing computer code, comprising: storing a device-independent intermediate representation of a source code; and in the event an indication is received that the source code has changed, using the changed source code to generate and store a new intermediate representation of the changed source code.
[...]
8. A method as recited in claim 1, wherein the intermediate representation comprises LLVM intermediate representation (IR), LLVM byte code or other byte code, or another appropriate intermediate representation.

"LLVM IR" is also mentioned in the application's "Detailed description" but only as an example. The specific mention, at [0016] in the application, reads:

Converting code written in an interpreted language, such as JavaScript, into an intermediate representation, such as LLVM intermediate representation or another storable intermediate representation, is disclosed.

Prior art babble

There are no accusations or threats of litigation, so no one is in need of prior art. Still, some people have discussed it for hypothetical situations. Suggestions can be briefly noted here.

But keep in mind that prior art has to predate a specific patent, and has to accurately describe the specific idea allegedly infringed by the attacked software. Since there's no litigation, and thus no specific patent or specific piece of software, this discussion is just a collection of very general starting points.

Patents using "LLVM" but referring to something else

Some of Apple's patents use the abbreviation "LLVM" to refer to other things, such as "low-level virtual memory", as used in US 6263421, titled Virtual memory system that is portable between different CPU types.

Confusing this LLVM with the compiler named LLVM would be a silly mistake which should be avoided.

External links

News selection

(newest first)

References

  1. ↑ http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/09/apple-made-a-deal-with-the-devil-no-worse-a-patent-troll/
  2. ↑ http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2010/11/former-sgi-files-patent-infringement-lawsuit-against-apple.html
  3. ↑ http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20100153929
  4. ↑ http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/40318/status#current-disclosures
Retrieved from "https://wiki.endsoftwarepatents.org/w/index.php?title=Apple_Inc.&oldid=31202"