[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
RE: [xml-dev] Small company makes big claims on XML patents
- To: 'Rich Salz' <rsalz@...>, Martin Probst <martin@...>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Small company makes big claims on XML patents
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@...>
- Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:58:47 -0500
- Cc: xml-dev@...
Hmm. The patents stand up to review 95% of the time and
aren't cheap to obtain.
The patent trolls aren't stupid or unpracticed. The good
news is that according to the cnet article, some other
well-practiced attorneys are stepping up to fight this one.
It will be instructive to watch.
Be smart, not arrogant. EOLAS won because law favors
documentation over myth and memory. Sun won because
no one had the money or interest to fight and the holder
isn't collecting off the top.
1. Use the semantic web technologies to document technical
designs. If we have learned much, we have learned the
power of cross-referencing and strongly-typed relations.
2. Use the semantic web to document legal decisions. If
we have learned much, we have learned that prior art and
research aren't cheap but the cheaper we make them, the
tighter the case.
The deeper the pockets in the town square, the more pickpockets
you will find there. If the semantic web has a certain future, it
is to zip and button pockets of knowledge and agreement.
No URI? No case.
len
From: Rich Salz [mailto:rsalz@...]
> means that your invention may not be completely trivial but must reach a
> certain complexity to be patentable.
>
> Is there something comparable in American patent law?
Yes; it must be innovative and not obvious to one "skilled in the arts."
The patent examiners are supposed to determine this. For software, in
particular, the demand seems to exceed the competence.
|
