Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

[News] Patent Thicket Harms XML, Proposed Solution Involving USPTO Fines

Hash: SHA1

Wait, Editing An XML Document Is Patented And Worth $98 Per Application?

,----[ Quote ]
| A bunch of folks sent in variations on the story about Microsoft losing a 
| patent infringement lawsuit to the tune of $200 million to a small Toronto 
| firm (the ruling also came right on the heals of another ruling against 
| Microsoft in a patent case, for $388 million).   


Another Simple Way to End the Patent Threat: Monetary Punishment and Rewards

,----[ Quote ]
| This is a simple, yet novel way to end the patent threat to Linux, FOSS and 
| generally anyone that the big corporations want to destroy or mess with. If 
| you look at the patent fee schedule at the USPTO, you'll see that it's 
| outrageously expensive to file a patent. This isn't a problem for the big 
| guys with the big fat bankrolls, but it's bad for the little guy. For those 
| too lazy to look at the link, the list essentially creates a picture of how 
| badly you get nickeled and dimed to death every time you file a patent.      
| Interestingly enough, this can be used to the advantage of FOSS and Linux 
| lovers the world over. 
| [...]
| The fine would work something like this. First, the entire fine would be paid 
| to the USPTO upon invalidation of the patent (Total fine should be the cost 
| of the original application +50% extra), of which 5% would go to whoever 
| successfully invalidated the patent, be it an examiner or an individual. In 
| short, if you invalidated a patent that cost a company $100,000 to get 
| approved, the total fine would be $150,000, of which you'd get $7500 for your 
| efforts.  (this same fee system could be applied to the first fine as well)  
| Think of it this way, if they start offering bounties like this on 
| invalidated patents, we would see two things.  First, we'd see the death of 
| one kind of patent troll, and the rise of another. Namely, a reverse patent 
| troll. And who would these reverse patent trolls be?          



EU Software Patents v3.0: The Patent Empire Counter Attack

,----[ Quote ]
| Four years ago, the European Parliament has rejected a directive that would
| have codified the practice to grant software patents by the European Patent
| Office. Now the President of the EPO has decided to refer the question of
| software patents to the Enlarged Board of Appeal, in an other attempt to
| validate the case law developed by the Technical Board of Appeals. Another
| attempt to create an harmonious interpretation of the Convention is the
| creation of a central patent court.


EU commission takes another shot at software patents

,----[ Quote ]
| The big problem with regard to software patents is the question of invested
| effort. The whole debate about software patents usually evolves around the
| question whether or not copyright is a sufficient protection for software. In
| my opinion it is, which can be shown very easily:
|    1. First you have an idea. This costs you nothing.
|    2. Then you sit down and invest work in an implementation of your idea.
|    This implementation is fully covered by copyright, and is your first real
|    investment into the idea.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index