Dailydave mailing list archives
RE: Patent fun
From: "Mike Bailey" <mike.bailey () sunbladesecurity com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 21:48:36 -0400
I really should go back and read this entire thread but considering what I have followed here are my questions and ramblings on the matter: Would this hypothetical database store an abstract of the idea, possibly the typical information found in patent applications as well as code snippets? Would there be a small fee for each submission? I assume the submitter would get a hash for what they submitted as well as a key to allow them access to it for later inspection or revision. It would be great for a legal person to chime in on what would actually make it through litigation. I bet the court's version of obviousness and originality routinely differ from what the submitters would generally describe. My concern is that Billy-the-coder submits an idea but leaves out most of the legal detail or fails to articulate himself correctly. That would simply chum the waters for an attorney from a company like, say, Santa Cruz something, therefore he might loose rights to his original idea by simply not understanding the legal requirements for it being contested in court.
-----Original Message----- From: dailydave-bounces () lists immunitysec com [mailto:dailydave-bounces () lists immunitysec com] On Behalf Of dave Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 6:06 PM To: Andrew Hintz ( Drew ) Cc: annalee () eff org; dailydave () lists immunitysec com Subject: Re: [Dailydave] Patent fun This is a really good point. It doesn't necessarally have to be searchable. It can be expensive. For example, the EFF could charge 50 dollars per minute to a 28.8 modem connection that allows consecutive viewings of pages where the data was listed. This would make it "non searchable" by the public, but still prior art when the EFF needs it, since it is publicly accessible. This thread is archived at: http://lists.immunitysec.com/pipermail/dailydave/2004-July/000680.html Dave Aitel Immunity, Inc. Andrew Hintz ( Drew ) wrote:In general prior art has to be public: http://www.iusmentis.com/patents/priorart/You know one thing that would solve all this software patenting nonsense? A database app anyone could submit to, whichwould store andtimestamp any idea you wanted to send it, occasionally submitting hashes to the NY Times or at the bottom of mailing list emails (to verify timestamps). However, this database would not besearchable bythe public. This way, companies would spend lots of money to get software patents, and then when they tried to sue someone,that personcould hire the EFF (as trustees) to search the database forprior art.The idea here is to make the system self-regulating - to put a negative price pressure on patents, because most patents will get overturned easily based on prior art in the database. -dave_______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list Dailydave () lists immunitysec com http://www.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
_______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list Dailydave () lists immunitysec com http://www.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
Current thread:
- Re: Patent fun, (continued)
- Re: Patent fun Mordy Ovits (Jul 02)
- Re: Patent fun dave (Jul 02)
- Re: Patent fun Mordy Ovits (Jul 02)
- Re: Patent fun Blue Boar (Jul 02)
- Re: Patent fun Halvar Flake (Jul 02)
- Re: Patent fun Frank Knobbe (Jul 02)
- Re: Patent fun dave (Jul 02)
- Re: Patent fun Mordy Ovits (Jul 02)
- Re: Patent fun Lee Brotherston (Jul 02)
- Re: Patent fun Mordy Ovits (Jul 02)
- Re: Patent fun dave (Jul 07)
- RE: Patent fun Mike Bailey (Jul 07)
- Re: Patent fun Mordy Ovits (Jul 02)