[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
A question to ask is why was the system working ten years
ago and why is it not working now? Scale and opportunity.
The 'we can take the sets in the barn and put on a show'
approach is biting us now. Sometimes those sets were
stored by someone who is paying the storage fees and
didn't rent them out.
I also think prior art could apply, but the judges aren't
convinced so far. A dilemma is that some of these patents
are legit and are enforceable, and no one bothered to find
out.
len
From: Jonathan Robie [mailto:jonathan.robie@datadirect.com]
Regardless of the amount, I think there is prior art for this patent. But
we are all losers when it is so difficult and expensive to determine who
owns intellectual property. If your patent is spurious, you still have a
chance in court, where decisions will be made by people who may not
understand the IP issues. If you have a valid patent, that doesn't mean
that you can ever enforce it against a company with better lawyers than you
have, and you may not have enough money to even try. I have friends who
have decided not to file patents for just this reason, and one who decided
not to start a business for just this reason.
If we want to encourage innovation in this company, we need a patent system
that works for both large, established companies and small startups.
|
