Les Mikesell wrote: > On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 11:52 -0500, Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote: >>> I don't see a solution there... Either a company patents it now as a >>> protective measure or they let someone else do it. Either way >>> it might end up owned by someone else later. What's the alternative? >>> Do you expect the patent office to suddenly start doing their job >>> and disallowing patents that are obvious or mathematical algorithms? >>> >> There is one - publish it without patenting it. Then it is prier >> art, and can not be patented. You may still end up in court, but it >> makes it fairly easy to defend yourself when you can produce a >> publication of the application that the other company says infringes >> on their patent that predates their patent. > > But that opens the door to small variations that others can still > attempt to patent. For example the only real difference in the > (now expired) RSA patent that was granted early on in this mess > and a prior version was the use of prime numbers as factors. > I guess if you had a patent, you could threaten to sue the other company on patent infringement. Outside of that, I do not see the difference. If it is different enough not to be covered by prier art, then it is different enough to get a patent on. Mikkel -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!
