🚀 go-pugleaf

[]
>In article <1654@aber-cs.UUCP> pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:
>In article <38764@apple.Apple.COM> baum@apple.UUCP (Allen Baum) writes:
>  
>  First of all, IBM has patents on their particular implementation of a
>  reverse map MMU.  This does not imply they invented it, nor does it
>
>They have *very* wide ranging claims. Remember also that this is the company
>that spent millions of dollars advertising their discovery of virtual memory.

Um, later on you say you can't get copies of the patents- so how do you
know that the claimes are very wide ranging? I found them fairly limited.

>  Secondly, if you can prove that you worked on something and that it
>  was in the public domain prior to when IBM claimed they invented it
>  (public domain in this context means that it was not kept a trade
>  secret, I believe), then you can actually invalidate IBMs patent
>  claims, should they conflict.
>
>Yes, spending a few hundred thousand dollars. IBM, if they cared about their
>patent, could sue *me*, conceivably, to protect it, if I made such a claim.

Well, no. If you tried to sell a product that they felt conflicted, or
you sued to have their patent deemed invalid, then they'd probably come
after you. Mostly, they just come to you can say: look, we have 50
bazillion patents you are violated (almost certainly true if you look
at what IBM has invented -as opposed to what their marketing people
might claim they invented)- so, we'll let you use ours if you let us
use yours.

In any case, they can't sue if you publish a paper, even if you claim it
is novel, and they claim its patented. We're talking patents here, not
copyright, and the rules are quite different.

>That's the scary thing. I could not get hold of the IBM patent (all the info
>I know comes from a Byte article on the ROMP),

See above


--
		  baum@apple.com		(408)974-3385
{decwrl,hplabs}!amdahl!apple!baum