[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive][an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] (none) [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive][an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive][an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive][an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] (none) [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive][an error occurred while processing this directive]
 
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]
Skåne Sjælland Linux User Group - http://www.sslug.dk Home   Subscribe   Mail Archive   Forum   Calendar   Search
MhonArc Date: [Date Prev] [Date Index] [Date Next]   Thread: [Date Prev] [Thread Index] [Date Next]   MhonArc
 

Re: [ITPOLITIK] GROKLAW: 3 Initiatives to Improve the Patent Mess Announced



Carsten Svaneborg wrote:
Michael Rasmussen wrote:

Åbenhed i proceduren giver da i det mindste mulighed for at komme med
input. Skrækeksemplet er den netop overståede sag med FAT, hvor kun MS
havde lov til at komme med partsindlæg til USPTO.

For at spille djævlens advokat.

Spørgsmålet er om folk er interesseret i at bruge deres tid på dette,
og derfor om det fungerer i praksis. Der er credits i at være kernel
contributor, men USPTO contributor?

Jag har inte läst hur den där "patent quality index" skulle fungera. Är det manuell bedömning inblandad?


Jeg har tidligerer foreslået at patentansøgeren indbetaler en "pant",
som de får tilbage hvis patentet udstedes, ellers kunne den gives til
den/de folk der indrapporterer prior art.

Om jag hade prior art skulle jag sälja det till patentinnehavarens konkurrent, inte till USPTO.


Hvis patentkvalitetet ikke øges nævneværdigt som resultat, og OSS
bevægelsen støtter det, hvad for politisk indflydelse kan vi så
have i forsøget at forhindre at software patenteres?

Jag tror det enkleste budskab er det bedste: "Att lade patentere læse programel och programmerere læse patenter er en lose-lose situation".


//Erik




 
Home   Subscribe   Mail Archive   Index   Calendar   Search

 
 
Questions about the web-pages to <www_admin>. Last modified 2006-02-01, 02:01 CET [an error occurred while processing this directive]
This page is maintained by [an error occurred while processing this directive]MHonArc [an error occurred while processing this directive] # [an error occurred while processing this directive] *