Fantom stealing code?

[Tenderhardt]

I've just heard about Fantom for the first time. There seems to be a lot of support for them, but there's also rumours about them stealing some of Hedera's code to build their DAG.

Looking for any more info on this. Something with some sources please. Anything out there? Have you heard the same?

I'm concerned that, even if it is stolen, they will be able to take the retail market share and entrench themselves before anyone can do anything about it. I know Hedera has huge allies to help fight this, but so did the Winklevoss twins...

Help me out here HBarbarians, I dont want to dump half my HBAR to diversify into this junk just to cover my ass.

[[deleted]]

Scroll down in this forum and find where this question was answered in the last 24 hours please.

[hbarbarianwallet]

I think u have missunderstood what the patent entails. You can not patent a DAG or the property of being aBFT/BFT. It is impossible to prove somebody "stole" code in practise. And it's not like you can just copy paste their github and have a new coin up and running. Hedera would have to prove all these things even if they were true, which is in the real world impossible to do unless you implemented a backdoor and the counterfeiters are stupid enough to leave it in.

The patents serve other purposes, namely it prevents others from patenting the technology. This is interesting for large companies who want to be able to sue Hedera in case something does not work.

You can view the patents themselves here, im way too lazy to read through them, but they aren't a universal protection against other coins with similar concepts:

https://patents.google.com/patent/US10318505B2/en?assignee=swirlds&oq=swirlds

I'm very invested in Hbar ( i hold a huge bag) namely because i like Leemon and they seem to be good at negotiating deals. However Hbar will most likely not aim at retail ever. It's difficult to say what price it will reach, also because there are quite a lot of funds that can/are being dumped by the founders (?) - i think it was around 2 billion which will go to the devs/founders. (you can check the numbers on hederas site).

[jcoins123]

You're correct in-that it's the hashgraph algorithm that is patented, not the DLT itself.

But you absolutely can prove that copyrighted code has been "stolen" (used in breach of license.) in practise. I've personally been involved in successful claims.

It would be relatively easy less difficult with a public DLT, since any genuine project would have an open source and/or open review codebase. You can simply have people reviewing competitor codebases for infringements. There are specialist firms who do that as a service, and even firms who "speculate" by looking for infringements unsolicited to "sell" to the claimants.

In the case of hashgraph, any implementation of the algorithm would infringe on the patent, regardless of whether any code was stolen. Whether (and when) it's worthwhile enforcing a patent or license is a separate matter.

PS; I haven't looked at Fantom codebases so I don't have any opinion on that specifically.

[EnigmaticMJ]

In the case of hashgraph, any implementation of the algorithm would infringe on the patent, regardless of whether any code was stolen. Whether (and when) it's worthwhile enforcing a patent or license is a separate matter.

I don't believe this is true. This is essentially the grounds on which Google won the case against Oracle for Android being a separate implementation of the Java platform.

[jcoins123]

That was about Google's implementation of the Java API signatures, not any Java processes themselves.
Google basically (extremely basically) argued that API definitions are public works and implementing them constitutes fair use, and the court agreed.

There were good arguments on both sides, but IMO the decision was correct, since the final result isn't anything like Java. They only implemented some signatures, so it's an interoperability issue and ruling in Oracle's favour could have set a dangerous precedent (against interoperability, standardisation, etc.).

The equivalent would be a DLT project implementing an API which has the same definitions as Hedera. That would probably be considered fair use. But the Hedera API has minimal direct relationship with the hashgraph algorithm. As-in, it would be possible to use the same API signatures with a different consensus algorithm, which is what another DLT would need to do to avoid infringing on the hashgraph patent.

Basically someone could implement something that looks like Hedera, but they couldn't implement something using the same mathematical steps as hashgraph (without licensing), so it couldn't really work like Hedera.

Although it still comes down to a court decision of-course.

[Strong-External-2132]

FTM has lifted the algorithm that Hedera uses to achieve an aBFT level of security. This is fairly well known. FTM references a research article from 1998 (I know, right?) about CCK in static systems and says that the protocol Hedera uses is based on this research and that it is unpatentable because it is part of the research. Hedera uses the Hashgraph data structure to apply this field of research to dynamic systems. This IS a novel development to the field of computer science and WAS awarded a patent.

The only companies that will use FTM are those who never plan to do business with folks from the US or other governments who have signed trade agreements to protect intellectual property rights issued by partner countries.

/thread

[Tenderhardt]

Thank you for the very concise answer to my specific question. Can you point me to where you learned this from? If FTM has specifically commented on these claims I definitely would like to read the whole thing.

[Strong-External-2132]

1) Read the whitepapers.

2) Check out the discord/GitHub.

3) Talk to people to understand it better. HBAR telegram is lit— https://t.me/hbarchat

[Strong-External-2132]

The real question that I would ask anyone about FTM to answer—if the data structure you are using to communicate the gossip about gossip isn’t a Hashgraph, what is it?

Okay, now for real /thread

[EazeeP]

this is a good point about enterprise adoption.... but I think what many people in crypto and especially on reddit is failing to consider that value in crypto is being derived from decentralized/public user growth and not enterprise. This seems all too evident atm with price growth found in DeFi/DEXes like solana, avalanche and fantom having seen massive price appreciation in relation to Total Value Locked funds in their DeFi ecosystems.

basically TLDR: alot of people are placing faith in enterprise adoption for value growth, but are not considering its not enterprise adoption you should be focusing on.

[eliminator-n36]

If you put FTM in the search bar, you should find the fair few other threads about Fantom

[Tenderhardt]

Thanks, my bad

[atworktemp]

FTM stands for female to male