<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid87lkjrf9s1.wl@dekkers.cx" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">At Thu, 25 Jan 2007 10:03:01 +0000,
Dave wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Andy Robinson wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I'll stand corrected on this but I recall we had a long discussion on bezier
curves maybe more than a year ago, a search of the list (probably on talk at
the time) should find something. One of the issues that was flagged at the
time was a patent that Navtech has on bezier curves. I think it was one of
the reasons the idea was dropped quicker than it might otherwise have been.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">You can't patent bezier curves, there's prior art. Saying we will use
bezier curves, /but on a map/, is such a non-patent it isn't even funny.
And automatically figuring out what curve to use from a series of
straight lines has been functionality in vector graphics programs for
donkeys years.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Prior art doesn't really stop the patent office from granting
patents. </pre>
</blockquote>
Very true, although that's just laziness really as it does invalidate
the resulting patent -- if you can afford the lawyers to challenge it
that is.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid87lkjrf9s1.wl@dekkers.cx" type="cite">
<pre wrap=""></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Keep the software in Europe and for the moment at least we avoid the
insanity of requiring an army of lawyers and the backing of a
multinational to do things which are basic and obvious.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Most software patents exist in Europe too. For example, EP0919788
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://publications.european-patent-office.org/PublicationServer/xmldocument?docId=4767068#CLAIMS">https://publications.european-patent-office.org/PublicationServer/xmldocument?docId=4767068#CLAIMS</a>)
is the European version of US6366927.</pre>
</blockquote>
Pity.<br>
<br>
I think my point is I'd rather nobody on the list knew anything about
any patents that might or might not be related to something we're
doing. Mostly this is because:<br>
a) Half the time we don't know what the patent is actually for<br>
b) We have no real way of assessing whether or not we're infringing<br>
c) We have no sensible way of determining whether, if we are
infringing, the patent stands a chance of being valid<br>
<br>
If the first thing we know about something is someone actually making a
fuss about an infringement, then we stand a better chance of arguing
that the patent was stupid to start with. We can then either chose to
fight or change what we're doing. But as the truth is we're almost
certainly going to step on a million patents just by storing lat/lon
points on a computer, and doing it using some computer programs, and
we're never going to try an exhaustive search to check we're not
infringing (no-one does as you'd need infinite resources), there's very
little point in occasionally asking the question about something
someone stumbles across.<br>
<br>
One software company I've worked for had the policy that the only
interaction developers should have with patents is that if they think
they come up with something new they should tell the lawyers. The
lawyers then ask some questions. The developer may get told at a later
date that they now have a patent, yey!, which came with a bonus in the
pay packet. It's very explicit, that at absolutely no point should a
developer try and figure out if something is already patented, their
absolute best state is ignorance, and they should <i>never</i> ask the
lawyer what happened to that patent idea they had last year...<br>
But then this company has a massive patent portfolio to smash people
with if they do something they don't like. They also have more lawyers
than most companies have total workforce.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>