Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.
Re: Giving birth through conversation
Author: Tom von Alten Posted: 8/14/2000; 6:28:04 PM Topic: I patent breathing. I was here first. Quit breathing. Msg #: 19714 (In response to 19691) Prev/Next: 19713 / 19715
The speed at which patents are issued didn't used to seem like such a big deal, nor did their term seem unduly long. Now, obviously, things have changed. (Especially since the scope of what the USPTO says can be patented has widened considerably.)But take your pick -- do you want it to be fast, or slow? The faster it is, the sooner the public gets to see the ideas. I'm not sure where it is between suggestion and implementation, but I understand that there will be disclosure of US patent applications, 18 (?) months after they're submitted, as there are now for European and Japanese patents.
In my experience, it seems to give the lawyers a head start in wrangling, but in at least one instance, it did provide the means to obviate a rather large-scale dispute by prompting early negotiation with the applicant.
There have been (claims of) cases apparently of companies working on open standards bodies, patenting the work of the working group.
Who did what, when, and with whom on a standards body is always a dicey matter, I expect. There is a tremendous opportunity for dragging one's feet while pursuing patents (et al.) behind the scenes, taking advantage of the "insider information." After you've been in a standards body, the wisdom of de facto standards becomes plain.
I know of a case from first-hand experience where a 3rd party that was privy to a standards body deliberation (it should have been under NDA) applied for a slew of patents on others' work -- some of it my work. I'll just let you imagine the expletives that I used, and where that company now sits in my esteem. They acted under the Japanese patent system, however. Different rules there, most especially that it's not the "first to invent," but "first to file" who wins protection.
You want an opportunity for abuse?!
Here's my points in all this:
. The multiple patent systems in the world need reconciliation and reform, most definitely.
. I don't see how companies can say "yes" to a call for unilateral disarmament.Choosing who to do business with on the basis of who applies for or wins patents is a bad idea, imho. But choosing who to do business with on the basis of who behaves themselves with their patent portfolio, and who works for reform seems like a good idea (and I do it myself).
I haven't made up my mind on Amazon. From my direct experience, I know that most people are not going to be aware of who the worst abusers of the system are.
This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:04 PM.
© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.