🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: gnu.misc.discuss
Article #72047

Re: The cost of SW patents

#72047
From: Jeffrey Kegler
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1992 00:18
45 lines
2809 bytes
In article <703867994snx@crynwr.com> nelson@crynwr.com (Russell Nelson) writes:
>In article <36514@ogicse.ogi.edu> morgan@ogicse.cse.ogi.edu writes:
>
>  >   "If we don't file a patent for this product before it's introduced,
>  >   then any number of companies could duplicate the product, file a
>  >   patent application, and force us to pay royalties for our original
>  >   work."
>
>Nope.  They could publish a description of the patentable matter.

I suspect the original statement was a bit of disinformation.  They
want to use the patent process but perhaps know how unpopular it is
among hackers.  Therefore they claim their motives are only defensive.

My understanding (I am not a lawyer) is that if you simply wish to
defend against patents, you clearly establish prior art, and this will
invalidate any attempts to patent your invention.  It's a lot cheaper,
too.

On this topic, in the last USENIX proceedings, there was a paper for a
program to detect memory leaks.  (I did not read it carefully, but it
looked very brute force.)  The program was patented.  Since LPF and
USENIX membership and interests overlap, would it be possible to have
USENIX vote not to accept papers on patented software unless the
technical merit of said software is clearly major?  Otherwise USENIX
is subsiding the advertizing budget of these outfits.

USENIX would have more reason for this policy than shared goals with
LPF.  Contrary to USENIX's purpose of promulgating technical knowledge
(and, for that matter, the original goals of patent law itself) firms
that patent software usually enforce the maximum possible (or greater)
legal secrecy on their creations.  This makes it difficult for other
investigators to learn from and to build on their work.  Hence, what
useful purpose for our trade the publishing of papers on such software
in the USENIX proceeedings would have is not usually evident.

That is to say, USENIX's academic interests and LPF's legal/political
ones are congruent in this matter.


-- 

Jeffrey Kegler, Independent UNIX Consultant, Algorists, Inc.
jeffrey@algor2.ALGORISTS.COM or uunet!algor2!jeffrey
137 E Fremont AVE #122, Sunnyvale CA 94087
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1992Apr23.001851.10636@algor2.algorists.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!algor2.algorists.com!jeffrey
References: <36514@ogicse.ogi.edu> <703867994snx@crynwr.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,c49ad45ad13bf04b
X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1992-04-22 17:18:51 PST
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!algor2.algorists.com!jeffrey
From: jeffrey@algor2.algorists.com (Jeffrey Kegler)
Subject: Re: The cost of SW patents 
Reply-To: jeffrey@algor2.algorists.com (Jeffrey Kegler)
Organization: Algorists, Inc.
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 92 00:18:51 GMT
Message-ID: <1992Apr23.001851.10636@algor2.algorists.com>
References: <36514@ogicse.ogi.edu> <703867994snx@crynwr.com>
Lines: 45