Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
details. make that 24.28 times the useful life At 04:41 PM 3/29/2000 -0800, you wrote: >patents are 17 years. > >>From: "Kevin Connell" <kevin@nw*.co*> >>To: "Mark G." <markg@pa*.ne*>, Technical Diving Mailing List >><techdiver@aq*.co*>, Cave Diving Mailing List <cavers@cavers.com> >>Subject: RE: JOHNS SCUBA >>Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 13:09:12 -0800 >> >>Precisely! >> >>The secret recipe for coke? Not patented folks. And secret corporate >>business processes aren't patented. >> >>And as an aside, patent law was written when 7 years wasn't a >>technologically long time, and the side affect *was* to allow the public to >>benefit from public record of invention. With most high tech stuff now, 7 >>years of patent is 10 times the useful life of the technology. >> >>At 11:51 AM 3/29/2000 -0800, Mark G. wrote: >> >>> > >>> > Patent law is written to protect the public. >>> >>>Not true; The constitution, where our patent system was born, says in >>>article 1, section 8 "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by >>>securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to >>>their respective Writings and Discoveries"; there is nothing about >>>protecting anyone but the inventors, and this is done in exchange for them >>>promoting their ideas, i.e.. making them public so the rest of society can >>>benefit. Note that if you conceal the idea, you will most likely not be >>>able to patent it. >>> >>> >Patent holders have >>> > no right to >>> > stop you from using their invention. They only have the right to >>> > charge you a >>> > license fee. >>> >>>Also not true; injunction is a standard remedy and you would be prohibited >>>from making, using, selling, importing etc. the infringing product. A fee >>>is not even a remedy going forward, only looking back for past infringement >>>(because you cannot change the past and give a retroactive injunction) >>> > >>> > What the rate of that fee is must be negotiated but if you think >>> > the patent >>> > holder is asking too much you can take it to court. >>> >>>Not true; you cannot "take it (the fee) to court" , but you can seek to >>>invalidate the patent or prove non infringement, which results in no fee >>>paid. If you lose, the court/jury will decide the reasonable royalty, >>>HOWEVER, this will be only for PAST infringement, and you will most likely >>>get an injunction for the future. And if you knew you infringed and did it >>>anyway because you didn't like their fee, you may get TRIPLE damages >>>depending upon the judge (it is proscribed in the law that he can award up >>>to triple the damages for willful infringement). >>> >>> > >>> > If a patent holder does not build a device themselves or license >>> > it, they can >>> > lose their patent rights. >>> >>>This is not true; read the constitution quote above. there is nothing about >>>this in the United States law, and it is totally legal to exclude others >>>even if you don't build it yourself. See Injunction discussion above. >>>Patent law in general doesn't care what you do; note it does not even ALLOW >>>you do to ANYTHING EXCEPT exclude others from practicing your invention. >>>Just because you have a patent does not allow you to practice the invention >>>if others have patents on your product. >>> >>> > >>> > In most cases like this competitors don't want to be seen as >>> > having to use their >>> > competitors' technology or they simply don't want to pay the money for a >>> > license. >>> >>>Just about everyone in high tech uses each others patents; no way to avoid >>>it. We all license what we can, and fight where we cant. I just completed >>>a two year series of litigations Monday which cost about $20M in legal fees, >>>where I had to teach the other company a lesson they wont soon forget about >>>patent law. They lost their best patents to us, and their licensing program >>>was devastated all because they "didn't want to be seen having to use their >>>competitors technology". Go figure >>> >>>Mark >>> >>> > >>> > >>> > Best Regards, >>> > >>> > Rick Fincher >>> > Thunderbird Technologies, Inc. >>> > rnf@tb*.co* >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aq*.co*'. >>> > Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aq*.co*'. >> >> >>---------------------------------- >> Kevin Connell <kevin@nw*.co*> >> >> NW Labor Systems, Inc >> http://www.nwls.com >> >> Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest. >> (A thing is only worth what someone else >> is willing to pay for it) >> >>---------------------------------- > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ---------------------------------- Kevin Connell <kevin@nw*.co*> NW Labor Systems, Inc http://www.nwls.com Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest. (A thing is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it) ----------------------------------
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]