[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Lame patent application of the day

• To: 'Doug Ransom' <Doug.Ransom@p...>, Dennis Sosnoski <dms@s...>, XML DEV <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Lame patent application of the day
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 16:09:13 -0600

It is possibly more correct to say that it 
enables their right to license their intellectual 
property including the right to determine the 
terms of licensing which may include exchange 
of money, services in kind, like valued items, 
royalty free, and so forth.   Their are two problems 
that are becoming increasingly troublesome:

1.  Determining the originality of the work.

2.  Unusually long durations for the right 
    to license.

Item one is something that we can influence 
as shown by the cited paragraph

35 U.S.C. 301. Citation of prior art

at

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/mpep_e8_2200.pdf

Thanks to James Anderson for looking that up for us.

Again, this is where open standards organizations have 
benefited the technical community by ensuring a greater 
awareness of art sufficient to enable prompt input. 
After that, the onus is on the technical community to 
provide it.

Item two is particularly troubling in the other domain 
of copyrights.  Technical patents by the nature of 
the fast pace of change has a more limited lifecycle. 
That can tend to make a holder try to get as much 
up front as possible.   The 'reasonable' in RAND 
is very underdetermined.

len

From: Doug Ransom [mailto:Doug.Ransom@p...]

Well, the very purpose of the patent system is to provide inventors a monopoly in exchange for them disclosing their ideas.

I don't imagine claim 1 will be granted or defensible if it already has been -- dde + excel server + excel client looks familliar.

• Prev by Date: RE: Lame patent application of the day
• Next by Date: RE: Lame patent application of the day
• Previous by thread: RE: Lame patent application of the day
• Next by thread: RE: Lame patent application of the day
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread