Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watdcsu.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watdcsu!magore
From: magore@watdcsu.UUCP (M.A.Gore - ICR)
Newsgroups: net.micro.atari16,net.micro.amiga,net.micro.68k
Subject: Re: 68000 Memory Managment
Message-ID: <2535@watdcsu.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 10-Sep-86 20:16:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: watdcsu.2535
Posted: Wed Sep 10 20:16:08 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 11-Sep-86 09:21:11 EDT
References: <508@elmgate.UUCP> <64@mit-prep.ARPA> <510@elmgate.UUCP> <6985@sun.uucp> <823@navajo.STANFORD.EDU> <79@mtxinu.UUCP>
Reply-To: magore@watdcsu.UUCP (M.A.Gore - ICR)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 56
Xref: watmath net.micro.atari16:1915 net.micro.amiga:4678 net.micro.68k:1808
Summary: 

In article <79@mtxinu.UUCP> ed@mtxinu.UUCP (Ed Gould) writes:
>>> I hate to tell you folks, but Andy Bechtolsheim here at Sun has a patent 
>>> (applied for and granted) on using the untranslated addresses as the 
>>> RAS addresses and doing the MMU address translation before the column 
>>> addresses are needed for CAS.
>>
>>How the hell can the patent office grant patents like this?  It's sort
>>of like patenting the idea of grounding DTACK on a 68000 or putting
>>chocolate ice cream in root beer; the idea is too obvious.  To coin a
>>phrase, it's patently ridiculous.
>
>If it's so obvious, why didn't anyone think of it before Andy did?
>Is the Set-UID bit (also patented) any less obvious?  Not to me,
>now that I've seen them both.  But I never thought of them; neither
>did anyone else, evidently, before their respective inventors.
>
>The person who first put chocolate ice cream into root beer probably
>didn't realize what they'd done.  They should have patented it, too!
>(Unless, of course, someone had already done the same thing with
>vanilla ice cream.  Then *they* should have pattented it.)
>
>The real question, to me, is (since the original poster suggested that
>Sun's competitors would have to start paying for this idea) Who really
>owns the patent?  The idea was developed while Andy was at Stanford,
>possibly (I have no idea, one way or the other) with public money.
>If it was developed with Federal money, then policy says that there
>will be no fees for use of the patent.  If Sun owns it, then there
>probably will be fees.
>
>-- 

	The problem is that the idea IS old... Many companies have used
the idea for paged MMU's. The idea would be obvious to people who design
high speed memory systems. High speed memory that uses RAS/MULTIPLE CAS
to cut down on access. When you think of one event followed by another
you *try* to do things in parallel while waiting. The question
and point I am making is two fold (OLD IDEA) and OBVIOUS) *in the circles
of memory design*. I'm really worried more about the *general case* of having
our common thinking patented. Or THEFT of ideas that are in current use
for profit. Some simple ideas don't have patents for similar reasons that
not all people use locks. Here the theif can make you pay... The later
comment should in no way be implied with SUN, it is an echo of general
concern that effects many of us. If someone comes up with something *new* 
and our knowledge is extended then great, give a patent!

	I would like to say that I understand Sun uses the method of RAS/CAS
delay decode. Perhaps they were the *first* and had the idea shortly after
DRAM's came out. Then my idea of OLD would be out..... > 10 years.
In any case I am quite interested in why they think they can get a patent.
Because if such simple ideas can be patented then it would be a good education
for all of us.

	
# Mike Gore
# Institute for Computer Research.
# These ideas/concepts *do not* imply views held by the University of Waterloo.