On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:39:57 -0800, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
<pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com> wrote:
Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
You may disagree with the legitimacy of software patents but until
they are abolished there is absolutely no question that it is
necessary to file for a patent if you want to use a
technology without
ending up in a lawsuit.
Huh? How does filing a patent protect you from ending up in
a lawsuit? You'd need an entire pool of patents for that.
But I guess I just don't get the irony...
The only prior art that the USPTO has shown the slightest interest,
competence or dilligance in checking is previous patent applications.
It costs roughly $5 million a time to put a patent claim to the test.
The Caller-ID patent is not the type of patent that provides technology
control with or without a standards endorsement.
Microsoft has more than enough bona fide patents to flatten FOSS any time
they chose, but they are most unlikely to do so unless FOSS became a much
bigger competative threat than Apple was at its peak. I don't think that is
very likely to happen.
Its like getting upset with the Soviets for deploying a new minesweeper, it
is simply not a significant change in the balance of power when the other
side has the abilty to go nuclear
I'm not sure that Microsoft is truly in a position to flatten FOSS any
time they choose. This would almost certainly be a variation on MAD
(Mutual Assured Destruction). Even if they won (technically) they
would probably lose in the greater sense (phyrric victory). Not that I
have an oar in that pond personally.
Mike