🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.patents
Article #27

Re: FAQ 6- Infringement

#27
From: Jim ADCOCK
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1992 07:04
19 lines
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.com
References: <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