🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991Nov5.143603.23182@freedom.msfc.nasa.gov> robichau@freedom.msfc.nasa.gov (Paul Robichaux) writes:
>>	Besides the social cost due to the collection of unnecessary
>>royalties, patents encourage oligopoly.  The big companies in an
>>industry can cross-license their patent portfolios and carry on
>>business as though most patents in their industry didn't exist, while
>>not offering such convenience to newcomers.
>
>   Fortunately for capitalism,  "big companies" don't necessarily have a
>   monopoly on innovation. Big companies (IBM, McDonnell-Douglas, Apple)
>   frequently license patents from smaller companies (NeXT, Polhemus,
>   MindSoft).

	I wasn't saying that cross-licensing makes it more difficult for
small companies to license their patents to big companies.  I was saying
that it makes it more difficult for small companies to obtain patent
licenses from big companies.

>    In some cases, a 17-year patent on a technology is very useful (cf.
>    TI's microprocessor patent.) In other cases, it's not (cf. Atari's
>    "PacMan" lawsuit vs. Magnavox.) Perhaps there's some intermediate
>    length of time which would be more appropriate, and which would
>    protect the innovator's effort and investment without forever 
>    choking related innovations.

	In software, the de facto monopoly provided by the year or two
that it takes to develop and market a "clone" software product to the
point where sales of the original software product actually drop, is
probably a sufficiently long time so that each of the developers of
the first software product will make the ~$100k or so necessary to
provide a sufficient incentive for them to write their software
product in the first place.

>    Apple's specific claim is that Microsoft licensed elements of the
>    Mac GUI for use in their Mac applications. Microsoft's specific
>    claim is that the license entitled them to *copy* those elements
>    and incorporate them into the Windows GUI.

	No.  According to 5/20/91 Daily Appellate Report of the Los
Angeles Daily Journal (which Haydn Huntley has made available to the
net), Apple's lawsuit against HP and Microsoft is a "copyright
infringement action."  Microsoft has used an agreement that they
had with Apple as one of their many defenses, and HP has used
that agreement in conjunction with one of their own agreements with
Microsoft as one of their defenses, but nobody is suing anybody for
breach of contract (at least not in that court record).

Adam J. Richter			adam@soda.berkeley.edu
409 Evelyn Avenue, Apt. 312	....!ucbvax!soda!adam
Albany, CA 94706		(510)528-3209