[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: XPointer and the '729 patent
- From: "Steven J. DeRose" <Steven_DeRose@brown.edu>
- To: "Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@east.sun.com>, xml-dev@lists.xml.org
- Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:47:10 -0500
I wish to echo Claude's point that a re-examination, if done, should
be done in a scrupulously open fashion.
If I understand the "normal" PTO re-examination procedure correctly
(<dcl>I am not a lawyer</dcl>), it involves only representatives of
the PTO and of the patent holder. This seems an obviously partial
procedure, since the PTO has an interest in supporting its own prior
decisions, and the patent holder has an interest in maintaining its
patent's validity.
This problem is compounded by the fact that such a re-examination
lends a (potentially spurious) sense of strengthened validity that
could adversely affect any later evaluations.
So, I suggest the following:
Either Sun do a simple "dedication to public domain" as someone
suggested (this would surely be cheaper than spending another couple
hours' of Sun attorneys' time),
or ensure that a re-examination be, as Clause suggested, include a
significant set of neutral third party experts. Surely several such
can be found on this list; assuming people consider me reasonably
neutral, I would be willing to help without fee (so long as the time
didn't get excessive).
--
Steven_DeRose@Brown.edu; http://www.stg.brown.edu/~sjd
Chief Scientist, Brown Univ. Scholarly Technology Group