[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] WWW /= W3C: Has W3C mission changed?
- From: Jeff Greif <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Jonathan Borden <email@example.com>,"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 11:01:22 -0700
If I understand correctly, a submarine patent is one that is applied for
(thus setting the date of invention) and then repeatedly extended or amended
before being granted by the patent office, thus delaying for (in some cases)
several years the public disclosure that goes with patent awards. Then the
patent can be used to go after people who infringed unknowningly. I think
there have been recent attempts to change USPTO policy with regard to these
patents to make this tactic less fruitful.
The issue is not failing to enforce a patent, but failing to disclose a
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Borden" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 8:35 AM
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] WWW /= W3C: Has W3C mission changed?
> That is incorrect for several reasons.
> First, "submarine" patents have _significantly_ diminished strength. An
> holder has an active responsability to enforce its IPR. Failure to inform
> and enforce means that while you may hold a patent, you loose the future
> right to seek damages from infringements of the patent. This is patent
> Ask any first year law student.