Write Free Software, Pay $203,000 to Patent Holder

the software was originally released in 2001 and the patent was originally filed in 2003 -

maybe my math if off but I think this software beat the patent and we probably should audit KAM and see if the software is using gpl'ed software.

since I am the first poster I just patented all other posts to this article. wuaaaaaagh!

According to US patent law, the patent holder can claim the invention date based on the "reduction to practice", not the filing date. That means the patent holder must have documented evidence of the invention that pre-dates the filing.

> the patent holder can claim the invention date based on the "reduction to practice"

And it's possible they've done so, but there's no evidence either way in the information we have. In such as case, isn't the patent limited to the time from the "reduction to practice" date, though?

meffie,

Good point.

However a countersuit charging possible copyright and gpl violation may be a good defensive move.

Make people think twice before suing again.

Not only is the patent office broken, so is the US court system. It's a war of attrition- whoever has the most money and determination will prevail.

Tuxchick, your absolutely correct. I posted an article on Microsoft having to pay out a few million for patent infringement. Not that I am a fan of Microsoft, but they were found guilty of patent infringement even though there was no final judgement on the validity of them. I queried PJ at Groklaw about this, and she calls this sort of situation the "Blackberry Bonk", where blackberry had to pay for patent infringements, even though those patents were later overturned. Talk about a screwball system!