🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <970031@gore.com> jacob@gore.com (Jacob Gore) writes:
> And to be public about the discovery and hide the fact that a patent is
> active or pending for it -- that is just plain unethical.

/ gnu.misc.discuss / waters@nddsun1.sps.mot.com (Mike Waters) / Mar 4, 1991 /
> When the patent is issued (is that the same as "active?") it is
> published by the US patent office. That is about as public as you can
> get.

Speak for yourself.  I can get much more public than that.  An example:

	The techniques presented by this article are covered by
	U.S. Patent #123,456,789.  Contact the third author for
	licensing details.

Now, that wasn't so hard, was it?

Can you offer an ethically justifiable reason for avoiding such notices?

I remember reading about a town where they put a law on the books that
certain streets had a lower than usual speed limit.  The law was published,
but the speed limit signs weren't posted.  Out-of-towners got hit with
speeding tickets left and right -- you know, "ignorance of the law...".

Jacob
--
Jacob Gore		Jacob@Gore.Com			boulder!gore!jacob