Groklaw's PJ says change for the better
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| vainrveenr May 01, 2007 8:28 AM EDT |
On the two U.S. Supreme Court patent issues PJ writes in http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070430121005424Quoting:2 Major Patent Rulings from the US Supreme Court Monday, April 30 2007 @ 12:10 PM EDTPDF links to the above two U.S. Supreme Court decisions are http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-1056.pdf and http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/04-1350.pdf ----- Could anyone better clarify how the patent world is "for the better" by these two patent decisions?? |
| bigg May 01, 2007 8:33 AM EDT |
> Could anyone better clarify how the patent world is "for the better" by these two patent decisions?? I'm not sure what you mean by your question. One decision said that there are geographical limits to patents. Another said that courts have to expand their notion of whether something is "obvious". At least to me, it seems this is a good thing. A problem with the patent system is that patents are too broad (in loose terminology). |
| vainrveenr May 01, 2007 10:33 AM EDT |
Gotta use the acronym IANAL :) Perhaps the better question is Who clearly gains the most from these two patent decisions?? As noted, Microsoft actually WON one of these two patent cases (vs AT&T here) geographically limiting patents to the U.S. From this case, one would guess that MS would focus its IP patent litigation FUD threats more and more on large companies headquartered WITHIN the U.S. Would not MS stand to gain the most from this refocus in the future -- in addition to its current billion$ saved from the outcome of the AT&T decision ??? At the same time, one would guess that making it "easier to challenge patents for failing to introduce genuine innovations" in the second case of KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc. would lead to actual IP challenges against MS, should MS decide to actually (foolishly?) follow-through on its patent litigation FUD. This taken together with companies (such as Ubuntu's Canonical) tightening up their patent portfolios would grant a better and better outlook for FOSS. Is any of this partially right ??? |
| bigg May 01, 2007 11:35 AM EDT |
@ vainrveenr: I'll let someone else do the legal interpretation, however... as far as I can tell, Microsoft does not view the current patent system as their friend. They might be willing to scrap patents altogether if they had the option. Their IP FUD is just playing the current system to their best advantage. They gain little from patents regarding Linux/open source, yet have to worry about lawsuits over MP3, patent trolls, and other real threats. I think MS and PJ would probably be in agreement about these rulings being a good thing. |
| dinotrac May 01, 2007 12:15 PM EDT |
>As noted, Microsoft actually WON one of these two patent cases This is the problem with viewing everything through the lens of good guy/bad guy or friend/enemy. It's OK for Microsoft to win something that benefits us all. Something that limits the scope of patents is a good thing. Thank you, Microsoft (sound of teeth grating). |
| vainrveenr May 01, 2007 1:32 PM EDT |
> This is the problem with viewing everything through
> the lens of good guy/bad guy or friend/enemy. Good point on this ambigosity! PJ expresses a somewhat similar sentiment within her Groklaw comments on the U.S. Supreme Court decision: Quoting:I also hope Novell and anyone else who signed a patent agreement with Microsoft over Linux is kicking themselves now.Directly touches on the gray area of whether the Novell-MS patent deal and the resulting modifications to GPLv3 are to ultimately be considered "good" or "bad" for ALL parties concerned. |
| jezuch May 01, 2007 2:33 PM EDT |
Quoting:Directly touches on the gray area of whether the Novell-MS patent deal and the resulting modifications to GPLv3 are to ultimately be considered "good" or "bad" for ALL parties concerned. Ohhh, it's still "guy/bad guy or friend/enemy" for Some People, it's just that the bad guy/enemy is no longer Microsoft... |
| devnet May 01, 2007 8:03 PM EDT |
I find that I don't trust anyone who censors comments on their own site. I take what she says with a grain of salt. |
| azerthoth May 01, 2007 10:17 PM EDT |
Considering M$'s recent happiness with tossing everything at the patent office to see what sticks, I think that they would be a little less than happy with the loosening of the original work litmus test. How many of those "patent everything" patents can hold up to the test of "natural progression"? |
| Sander_Marechal May 01, 2007 10:43 PM EDT |
Few, but consider MS spends more money fighting off the trolls than it spends patenting things it shouldn't patent. Also remember that MS is very reactionary, much like SCO. They say and do what fits them best *now* and disregard how this might affect their future. They're just going to wait until the future arrived and then react again. That's why they're happy. It's good for them in the short run. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!