[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openoffice-discuss
Subject:    Re: [discuss] Anti-Patents Stance
From:       "M. Fioretti" <m.fioretti () inwind ! it>
Date:       2004-04-11 14:44:07
Message-ID: 20040411144407.GB1456 () inwind ! it
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, Apr 11, 2004 16:11:33 PM +0200, Tony Earnshaw (tonye@billy.demon.nl) wrote:
> 
> Quite another thing is, that IP published in the public domain
> obviously can't be patented.

Ideally, yes. What happens in real life (like the one-click-shop thing
of Amazon, IIRC) is that sometime IP published in the public domain is
patented all right because:

    1) Most Patent Offices are living in wonderland (in the best case),
       don't see/understand/recognize prior art, and will accept
       anything which has no spelling errors and a nice logo. IIRC,
       the budget granted to some offices is proportional to the
       applications they filed/approved the year before.

    2) Companies know 1), and know that if the patent application is
    accepted, they can do pretty much what they want because no
    private citizen or volunteer association will ever have the money
    to even *file* a counter suit, never mind to carry it on for
    years.

Ciao,
	Marco Fioretti

-- 
Marco Fioretti                 m.fioretti, at the server inwind.it
Red Hat for low memory         http://www.rule-project.org/en/

rules should encourage thinking, not discourage it.
                   The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]