🚀 go-pugleaf

Graham Murray <graham@barnowl.demon.co.uk> writes:
>David Kastrup <dak@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:
>> Mark Evans <mark@grapefruit.ndirect.co.uk> writes:

>> > Otherwise it would be hard for any arbitrater to handle a claim of
>> > patent infringement. (Or the defence of "well I simply happened to
>> > come up with the same idea independantly.")

>> This is no defense.  Coming up with the same idea independently does
>> not give you a free run, unless you have *published* something before
>> the other person. 

Note that "published" can be sending a description of it to yourself,
the postmark and sealed envelope help establishs when you came up with the
idea. 

>Though if two (or more) people come up with the same idea
>independently of one another (and none knowing of the work/existence
>of the other(s)), does this not hint that the patent might be invalid
>because of the requirement that it be innovative and non-obvious (to a
>skilled practitioner in the field)?

My counter argument would be that there are 10,000 skilled practitioners
in the field and the problem has existed for X years, yet we were the
only ones to come up with the sol'n.  

Robert
Morphis@physics.niu.edu
Real Women change tires			abuse@uu.net postmaster@uu.net
Real Men change diapers                 security@uu.net