[Insight-developers] Patented code

[Miller, James V (Research)]

One question that we need to answer is what does the patent "cover"?


The patent uses language like
	
	sensor to measure points on a surface

and, 

	mathematical model of an object

and, 

	mean square error metric

Most of medical image devices do not measure points on a surface. At best, 
we use gradient information to infer a surface. Does grouping a CT image
and a gradient operator make it equivalent to a "sensor that measure
points on a surface"?

What about registering centerlines of vasculature?  The centerlines are
surely
not on any surface. Centerlines are presumably "inside" a swept cylinder.

Does registering two images based on features of those images in an ICP 
framework violate the patent? The patent refers to registering points
to a mathematical model.  Does it cover image to image registration?

Does the patent cover ICP algorithms that do not use a mean square error
metric?

I can't recall whether you have to violate all the claims of the patent to
be
infringing or whether violating any one of the claims triggers an
infringement.

For instance, the patent appears to cover a "shape inspection" application, 
where data from a range sensor or CMM is compared to a geometric model. If
our
application is not shape inspection, do we violate the patent?




-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen R. Aylward [mailto:aylward at unc.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 2:58 PM
To: Insight-developers (E-mail)
Subject: [Insight-developers] Patented code


I just spoke with a patent lawyer.

By distributing patented methods as code we are technically commiting a 
crime called "contributory infringement."   Even if we don't use the 
code ourselves, we are making it easier for others to do so.   No amount 
of documentation or disclaimer insulates us.  Being "open source" does 
not insulate us.   If someone notifies us that some code is patented, as 
someone just did regarding ICP, and we do nothing, then additional laws 
are being broken.

We must have written permission from the patent holder to distribute any 
code that implements a method covered by a patent.  In the event that 
the patent holder has granted an exclusive licenced of any portion or 
application of the patented technology, then we also need to get written 
permission from that licensee.

Seems like this is a huge headache.  As Bill has been telling us :)

It seems like we should not take on the burden of getting permission.

Option 1:
Anyone who contributes code must attain permission.   That permission is 
likely to have stipulations regarding the conditions of distribution 
(patented directory, etc.).  Are we willing to adapt our 
distribution/directory to fit requirements as they develop?

Option 2:
We don't allow patented code.

Other options?  Comments?

Stephen


-- 
===========================================================
Dr. Stephen R. Aylward
Associate Professor of Radiology
Adjunct Associate Professor of Computer Science and Surgery
http://caddlab.rad.unc.edu
aylward at unc.edu
(919) 966-9695
_______________________________________________
Insight-developers mailing list
Insight-developers at itk.org
http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers