| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
What's the penalty for knowingly lying in a patent application?What's the penalty for knowingly lying in a patent application?Posted Jul 13, 2004 23:43 UTC (Tue) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330)Parent article: Oracle patents content management systems
This patent, filed in 2000, claimed nonsense like "In the prior art, content contributors must go through the information technology department in order to publish content." That kind of whopper, it seems, rises to the level of deception; Oracle evidently counted on getting patent examiners who don't know anything. They reference only patents, and don't reference other literature at all. The people who did this work know better. We need to find ways of going beyond getting patents of this type quashed; the people who file such patents should be made to pay the expenses for the damage this kind of thing causes. It might be a good idea to contact the people whose names appear on the patent application, and ask them if they knew about sites like Slashdot, or wikis, in 2000, and ask them why they didn't mention this in the patent application. Busting people for lying about prior art is long overdue. Since the USPTO has too few resources to catch this stuff, there needs to be some other penalty.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||