[IP] more on more on more on Google wireless patents
Begin forwarded message:
From: John Shoch <shoch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: March 29, 2006 7:30:57 PM EST
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx, ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: John Shoch <shoch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [IP] more on more on Google wireless patents
Dave,
For IP, if you wish.
I hate to be the one throwing a blanket of reality of this, but the
argument below regarding "defensive patents" is a little off target:
-----Original Message-----
From: Glenn Fleishman <glenn@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: March 29, 2006 6:25:43 PM EST
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] more on Google wireless patents
"I thought it worth pointing out that there was Sturm und Drang when
Amazon.com had patents granted left and right on things like 1-Click
and so forth. I was working at Amazon.com from late 96 to early 97
when some patents were written, and drafted instructions for one of
them (but wasn't the inventor). My understanding at the time which
has been born out is that the patents were methods to prevent large,
direct competitors from obtaining a market advantage by describing
technology. Without the patents, Amazon.com certainly would have been
enjoined from all kinds of behavior and would be paying royalties
left and right."
---------------------------
If the writer of this note believes that Amazon (and others) only
want to protect their own ability to use an idea without paying
royalties, there are actually a number of ways to protect "freedom to
operate" without bothering to patent an innovation.
For example, those of us who have been around for a while will
remember the IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin. IBM could decide
that an idea was not worth the expense of patenting, but could
protect themselves by publishing it in their own Bulletin. This did
not give them exclusive rights, but instead served as the published
prior art which would stop anyone else from patenting the same idea.
[These journals were filled with both interesting and useless stuff.]
IBM has stopped publishing their own Disclosure Bulletin:
http://www.ibm.com/ibm/licensing/patents/disclosures.shtml
But they, and others, now make use of a third party to disclose
ideas, and to protect their own ability to use them in the future:
http://www.researchdisclosure.com/
If any company claims they "only want to protect their own ability to
use an idea without paying royalties" they do not need to go to the
expense of getting a patent.
Your loyal curmudgeon,
John Shoch
Alloy Ventures
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/