Lists Home |
Date Index |
* Bullard, Claude L (Len) <email@example.com> [2005-06-06 13:58]:
> From: Alan Gutierrez [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
>> Again, I know that people here have a grip on the threat, but
>> I thought I'd point out that just because it's obvious,
>> doens't mean you can't go bankrupt illustrating the obvious.
>> That the risk is real, and it imposes real costs on doing
> Which simply means that for the good of the community and
> protection against predatory acts:
> o Open source with clearly documented antecedents is
> the best practice because of transparency, auditability,
> and traceability.
> o Software source management tools should be used as
> evidence in patent cases to reduce the costs of litigation.
> While most here understand the dangers of software patents,
> their pecuniary advantages both offensively and defensively,
> the best course forward is to change the global systems toward
> registration systems bound contractually and by data inspection
> to the source management systems. This won't fix current
> cases but is a better game going forward for all rational parties.
These are good points Len, but it doesn't address the fact that
litigation is expensive, and you need to pay to have your day in
court. You might have a solid case, but with no funding, you'll
not be able to argue it.
Even the most frivolous patents are a liability, if the preditor
knows your the size of your purse.
> Some are overfocused on the USPTO because it makes them
> feel good and because you believe it unassailable so
> we/they/you are relieved of action. The best course is one
> that protects both innovation and community globally by
> formalizing the processes and reducing the costs.
Alan Gutierrez - email@example.com