🚀 go-pugleaf

Honestly, this discussion does not belong on comp.lang.c++.
It needs to be moved to a more appropriate place.

Having said that, in violation of my own request....


In article <1990Dec12.185220.9629@odi.com> dlw@odi.com writes:

> Also, it is already the case that you cannot patent something that is
> in widespread use before the patent exists.  The legal jargon phrase
> here is "prior art".  To defend a patent on, say, include files, you'd
> have to show that include files were not part of the state of the art
> prior to the patent.


The problem which endangers the whole software industry is that the U.S.
Patent Office specifically requires patent lawyers to be trained at the
undergraduate level in the technical discipline that they plan to apply
their law training to.  For example, lawyers dealing with aviation patents
must have a baccalaureate-level degree in aerospace engineering.
[Or something like that.  I may not have that at 100% accuracy.]

Further, the Patent Office SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITS Computer Science degrees
from being considered valid for this purpose!  The closest allowable area
is EE with a specialization in computers.

Hopefully, most of these EE/Lawyers are well enough versed in the software
side of things to avoid and prevent prior art from being patented.
Unfortunately, due to the pressures and complexities of law and business,
this seems not to be the case.  Prior art IS being patented; it is possible,
but VERY expensive, to prove the invalidity of these patents in court.


-- 
John Baldwin  | srchtec!johnb@gatech.edu
              | johnb%srchtec.uucp@mathcs.emory.edu