Article View: comp.patents
Article #27Re: FAQ 6- Infringement
From: Jim ADCOCK
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1992 07:04
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1992 07:04
19 lines
1421 bytes
1421 bytes
In article <4489@cluster.cs.su.oz.au> patents@cs.su.oz.au writes: |In copyright, independent creation is a complete defense. If you sit down |to the typewriter and happen to bang out the text of "Hunt for Red October", |having never seen Clancy's book, it will be a defense to Clancy's lawsuit |that you independently created it. The monkeys and the typewriters, etc. Its only a copyright defense if people are willing to believe it. I for one would not believe it no matter how many witnesses and/or documents you present to make your case. |(v) Can I build a patented device for my own use and enjoyment? | |People build infringing items in their sheds all the time, I suppose. But |in most countries including the US, this is no defense to infringement. |Activities in sheds are, of course, rarely detected and patent owners |can hardly stop what they have not detected. However, I believe building a patented device *purely* for experimental and/or educational value is explicitly permitted? Yes/No?
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<4607@cluster.cs.su.oz.au>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!metro!cluster!jimad@microsoft.comReferences:
<4489@cluster.cs.su.oz.au>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!metro!cluster!jimad@microsoft.com From: jimad@microsoft.com (Jim ADCOCK) Newsgroups: comp.patents Subject: Re: FAQ 6- Infringement Message-ID: <4607@cluster.cs.su.oz.au> Date: 7 Apr 92 07:04:16 GMT References: <4489@cluster.cs.su.oz.au> Sender: news@cluster.cs.su.oz.au Organization: Microsoft Corp. Lines: 20 Approved: patents@cs.su.oz.au