Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 28 May 2002 14:21:47 -0700 | From | "Jeff V. Merkey" <> | Subject | Re: A reply on the RTLinux discussion. |
| |
I've been reading all this discussion, and I think the solution is pretty simple. Patents are fairly easy to invalidate if you can show prior art. Novell and these big software companies do it all the time. When they implement something that infringes someone's patent, they wait until litigation is filed, then seek to invalidate specific claims in the patent. There are administrative procedures in place wih the USPTO that take this into account. It's expensive and you have to be willing to risk litigation.
Patents describe "methods". If you alter the methods, however slightly, it makes it tougher for the patent holder to win an infringement case. Based upon the whirlwind of discussion on this topic, it would seem that there is significant deviation from the patent claims to circumvent the probability that such claims would succeed.
The bottom line is you can get sued anyway. Patent cases are pretty tough to defend, but the only test will be to implement it, then wait for the patent holder to bring claims in US District Court and attack the basic claims in the patent on the basis of prior art.
This RTLinux patent appears, at least on the surface, to be another software "trash patent". Microsoft has thousands of such patents, and it's questionable they will ever be able to win enforcement on many of them. Ditto this case.
Jeff
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |