S
Spehro Pefhany
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
http://www.speff.comSpehro Pefhany said:
Spehro said:
Yes. This is trully wonderfull news. It has made my day!
I am surprised at the size of the majority though.
Kevin said:Yes. This is trully wonderfull news. It has made my day!
I am surprised at the size of the majority though.
Winfield said:Kevin Aylward wrote...
Don't you think many of them are on the wrong side and just
didn't want to see as an alternate the 20 plus compromise
modifications to try and fix the defective proposed software
patent rules? So those people will be back and make trouble.
Spehro Pefhany said:
http://www.speff.comBest regards,
Spehro Pefhany
Paul Hovnanian P.E. said:Good news. And bad news.
A common position on software patents (all patent, actually) will reduce
problems with IP crossing borders. The best policy on s/w patents would
be to restrict them to the s/w (firmware) that is an integral component
of a novel device.
The fear that I have (and maybe others in Europe do to) is that any move
toward a common position on software patents will also be a move toward
the US system. Worse yet, it will be a move toward Europe and the US
honoring each others patents. Since the USPTO will grant a patent on
practically anything, with no regards for prior art. Since Europe has
been more restrained in its practice of issuing these 'garbage' patents,
they will be at an extreme disadvantage.
So, what's wrong with copyright ?
Patents are often issued on specious grounds that likely may inhibit use of
what is in reality common or prior art.
You simply need a clever patent lawyer to claim 'ownership' of much that may
have gone before without comment.
Graham
Winfield Hill said:Kevin Aylward wrote...
Don't you think many of them are on the wrong side and just
didn't want to see as an alternate the 20 plus compromise
modifications to try and fix the defective proposed software
patent rules? So those people will be back and make trouble.