🚀 go-pugleaf

 FAQ Infringement Comment

 I have a minor comment to the tiny last section of the FAQ
 item on infringement.  As a patent holder, I view infringement
 very differently than the FAQ item would indicate:

>(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.


 There seem to be at least three different views of patent
 restrictions:

 1) The Patent Lawyer's View:
    What is not permitted is simply not permitted, so there!

 2) The Independent Individual's View:
    I can do anything I want in my own home!

 3) The Patent Holder's View:
    Do what you want as long as it doesn't cost me money!


 Clearly, the FAQ item in question represents viewpoint 1.
 Viewpoint 2 is represented frequently, often with considerable
 emotional content.  I would prefer to lay out viewpoint 3:


 A Patent Holder's View of Infringement

 As an individual patent holder, I can testify that the reason
 I applied for a patent was to--in some way--make money with it.
 My patent was the result of independent research:  I would
 like to imagine that I will eventually profit from the time
 and effort which led to my invention.

 With respect to making money from my patent, I am simply *not
 concerned* with infringement from a single individual working
 alone.  But I *would* be concerned about significant production
 and/or distribution efforts:

   * I would be very concerned with the distribution of free
   copies of my mechanism as implemented in free software
   (unless it is *my* software), because that could reduce the
   market for commercial copies.

   * I would be concerned if the owner of some company chose
   to make my invention "for his own personal use" (that is,
   for private commercial use throughout his own company).
   (In other words, valid cases can reasonably exist where
   "personal use" is not all that personal.)

 I have no problem at all with individuals manufacturing and
 using my mechanism for their own use, despite having government-
 granted patent rights to restrict such use.  Not only could I
 not *catch* somebody doing it, I have absolutely no interest
 in even *thinking* about that.  In fact, one could argue (and
 I do) that getting individuals to work with my invention could
 lead to greater acceptance, use, and profit.

 The concern of a patent holder with respect to infringement
 seems to be mainly economic.  Consequently, I would expect
 that a patent holder would hardly ever be worried about
 individual manufacture or use.  On this issue, a patent holder
 and a patent lawyer may well have conflicting goals, while an
 individual user may find himself or herself unexpectedly allied
 with the patent holder (and this is a good side to be on).

 ---
 Terry Ritter    Ritter Software Engineering    (512) 892-0494


[mod- hmm.. I suppose I think the FAQ should take a legal
point of view rather then argue the merits of a particular
stance...]