There are at least half-a-dozen patents on DDS held by RTI, as listed here: http://patents.justia.com/assignee/real-time-innovations-inc Two "big ones" seems to be http://www.google.com/patents/US8150988 http://www.google.com/patents/US8671135; one dates back to 2001-2002. A casual google search locates another, not from RTI: https://www.google.com/patents/US8874686 -- Linas On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Jon Binney wrote: > Aaron, > > There was a fairly long discussion of the RTI license in particular on the > ROS-NG mailing list: > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/ros-sig-ng-ros/license/ros-sig-ng-ros/j050JkfEtPk/jmZg5pYGdz8J > Brian does a good job of summing up the discussion in the last email in > the thread. There is also some discussion of the licenses of various DDS > implementations in http://design.ros2.org/articles/ros_on_dds.html . The > license section of that article could probably use an update since it was > written before the mailing list discussion. For example, it would be useful > to write down the current thinking on what types of licenses would be > acceptable for the default DDS implentation for ROS2. > > In my reading of the DDS license, I interpreted "OMG shall not be > responsible for identifying patents for which a license may require use of > an invention covered by patent rights..." to be pretty reasonable > boilerplate. I can't imagine, for example, that willow garage would have > wanted to be held responsible by all ROS users if it had turned out that > some part of the TCPROS design was covered by some random company's patent > claim. > > You have pointed out something I hadn't realized, though, which is that it > is probably worth documenting the patent and copyright implications of the > DDS/RTPS specifications themselves. Perhaps a section on that could be > added to http://design.ros2.org/articles/ros_on_dds.html ? > > Jon > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Aaron Schiffman via ros-users < > ros-users@lists.ros.org> wrote: > >> Hi Linus, >> >> I don't recall specifics, nor do I know the dev path osrf choose. I do >> recall ROS 2 DDS implementation was going to be from rti.com, and rti >> was going to provide it to ROS free of charge. >> >> RTI says on their website they control 70% of the DDS market, and over a >> trillion dollars in critical systems rely on Context DDS, and the statement >> in the omg dds 1.2 spec states: >> The attention of adopters is directed to the possibility that >> compliance with or adoption of OMG specifications may require use of >> an invention covered by patent rights. OMG shall not be responsible >> for identifying patents for which a license may be required by any >> OMG specification, or for conducting legal inquiries into the legal >> validity or scope of those patents that are brought to its attention. >> OMG specifications are prospective and advisory only. Prospective users >> are responsible for protecting themselves against liability for >> infringement of patents. >> >> Search Google patents and you will find some patents submitted explicitly >> for DDS related techs, and I can only assume some of the patents not >> mentioning DDS cover facets of DDS. >> >> I can only speculate on patents at this point, but regardless rti owns >> their software. So they definitely own some DDS related ip. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Aaron >> >> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From*:"Linas Vepstas" >> *Date*:Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 10:08 AM >> *Subject*:Re: [ros-users] ROS 2.0 Strategy review >> >> Hi Aaron, >> >> Can you clarify? Do you mean "IP of DDS", or IP of something else? Are >> DDS algos patented? There used to be talk of zero-mq-based ROS, but that >> seems to have disappeared from the table. >> >> My knee-jerk reaction is to be a bit suspicious of OMG-created >> technologies; they sound great at first, but are often over-wrought (e.g. >> corba). I'd never even heard a whisper about DDS before yesterday; I'm >> nervous about adopting a technology that has not yet gained any acceptance >> at all in the open-source community. So, for example, whatever one's >> opinion of zmq might be, positive or negative, its a "known thing"; many >> people have used it, there is developer experience, a track record. >> There's no such track record for DDS -- the proprietary world seems to be >> the primary consumer of the thing, and their experience with it is secret, >> and not shared. We don't actually know how well it works (although I admit >> it sounds really great, based on the wikipedia article). >> >> Anyway: please clarify: IP of what? And who "owns" that IP, who has >> rights to it? >> >> -- Linas. >> >> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Aaron Schiffman via ros-users < >> ros-users@lists.ros.org> wrote: >> >>> This doesn't feel right sharing my some of my thoughts I held back since >>> Roscon 2014 about ROS 2.0, but here goes: >>> The ip ownership and patent of the underlying ROS 2.0 distributed udp >>> protocol are of concern as a third party protocol implementor. Yes, ROS.org >>> or OSRF may have explicit legal permission to use said protocol, but it is >>> not truly an open/free platform when the public is at the mercy of the IP >>> owner, unless the entire platform is contractually opened up and made free. >>> >>> As a ROS protocol implementor Ive personally held off on implementing >>> ROS 2.0 protocols, while waiting to see how it pans out. I am still of the >>> belief that the UDPROS protocol with enhancements can do everything the new >>> protocol can do, but better. That really doesn't matter now though. >>> >>> I appreciate that osrf took the focus from protocols and put their >>> limited resources to work on tools. In an r&d organization that would be >>> the path I would expect to be the most rewarding, except that I've grown to >>> appreciate think of ROS as a rock that the open robotics universe revolves >>> around. Like I think of Linux, as an open operating system, except that ROS >>> is more an open set of design frameworks like tcpip is a standard protocol >>> with many implementors. >>> >>> Wish I could be there in Hamburg with you all! The birds of a feather >>> meetings, and the couple hours socializing with drinks were the most >>> influential on my development direction this past year. Watching roscon on >>> YouTube just will not be the same. >>> >>> I am so stoked about this upcoming year in Robotics I can hardly contain >>> myself (probably a good reason for me to not be there in October:) >>> >>> God bless Roscon 2015 in Hamburg! >>> >>> Aaron >>> >>> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ros-users mailing list >>> ros-users@lists.ros.org >>> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ros-users mailing list >> ros-users@lists.ros.org >> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users >> >> >