| |||||||||||||
OIN expands its coverageOIN expands its coveragePosted Mar 13, 2012 21:23 UTC (Tue) by Kwi (subscriber, #59584)Parent article: OIN expands its coverage
Hm. Why would Tom Tom joining OIN cause Microsoft to back down when MS is not part of the network, and with the network having no retaliatory powers?
(Speaking of retaliation, I have this dream of a patent-holder going all the way and forming a Software Patents Mutually Assured Destruction patent pool, its members forced to leverage their patents to the greatest possible extent against anyone launching a "first strike" software patent suit. With enough momentum, such a pool could force non-members to join by threatening to sue, thus growing katamari style. Considering that nobody has done this yet, I gather that even the companies most critictal of software patents see a value in them.)
(Log in to post comments)
OIN expands its coverage Posted Mar 13, 2012 23:47 UTC (Tue) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]
It's a nice idea, but it doesn't protect members from "non-practising entities" (patent trolls).
OIN expands its coverage Posted Mar 14, 2012 0:20 UTC (Wed) by droundy (subscriber, #4559) [Link]
I would also imagine that it'd be pretty difficult to define "first-strike". This kind of mutual-defense pact is what got WWI going. If there is an ambiguous case, then the mutual-self-destruction pact could end up attacking a "defender", when said defender tries to attack a perceived "aggressor".
OIN expands its coverage Posted Mar 14, 2012 1:22 UTC (Wed) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]
I can already hear the lawyers salivating...
OIN expands its coverage Posted Mar 14, 2012 12:55 UTC (Wed) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]
I would define it as: using any kind of patent in any kind of litigation. Pretty unambiguous. It would only work if the treat applied to the members of the pact themselves too, though, as a measure to prevent bulling.
But maybe a better approach would be to find a loophole in the patent system, in the spirit of Copyleft. Note how actually the patent law letter is abused to the exact opposite of it's initial intent (foster innovation). We need a symmetrical hack to reverse the situation.
I wouldn't be surprised to discover that RMS is thinking about it right now.
OIN expands its coverage Posted Mar 14, 2012 17:44 UTC (Wed) by armijn (subscriber, #3653) [Link]
two words: "defensive publications"
OIN expands its coverage Posted Mar 15, 2012 11:28 UTC (Thu) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]
Yes, that would be akin to a MIT license or a public domain Copyright disclaimer: it allows you to use the information without limits.
A Copyleft style hack would use the patent system to enforce the desired behavior. The problem being that patents are not like Copyrights, that are automatically granted...
OIN expands its coverage Posted Mar 17, 2012 17:37 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] I would define it as: using any kind of patent in any kind of litigation. So it would be for companies that are willing to give up exclusive use of every possible invention in exchange for the same from other members. I can definitely see how most of the current OIN members would not be interested in that. OIN restricts itself to certain kinds of inventions, but the members still get much use out of patents on other inventions. I note that major patent holders frequently lobby for patent law changes, but they never argue for eliminating patents altogether.
|
|||||||||||||