RE: [chairs] patent ruling and it's impact on standards organizat ions

[Jacques Durand <JDurand@fsw.fujitsu.com>]

Title: RE: [chairs] patent ruling and it's impact on standards organizations

Everyone knows about the abusive handling of software patents by the PTO,
but I do not see how this can be fixed any time soon...

Meanwhile I do believe that strengthening the disclosure policy of any group working
together on a standard is absolutely key, as confirmed once again in the
JEDEC / Rambus case, and that is a more attainable objective.

It is likely that if the standard organizations do not provide strong
legally-binding disclosure policies (at least as an option), the companies
involved in the standard work will have to complement the IPR policy of the org
by additional, separate legal collaboration agreements.

Jacques Durand

-----Original Message-----
From: David RR Webber - XML ebusiness [mailto:Gnosis_@compuserve.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 9:16 AM
To: Philpott, Robert; Chairs@lists.oasis-open.org'"
Subject: re: [chairs] patent ruling and it's impact on standards
organizations

Message text written by "Philpott, Robert"
> http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/pcworld/20030131/tc_pcworld/109132&e=4 <

Robert,

I'm not sure this teaches us anything new at all.

Just more of the same from the current rats nest
created and sustained by the PTO.

There have been extended and continuing threads
over in the W3C too on all this (W3C requirements
are more formal than OASIS right now IMHO).

As I've said over in the W3C - the solution is
NOT to be found within the W3C, nor OASIS, nor
anyone else.  All we are doing is trying to
contain outbreaks of the disease and treat them
when they occur.  Unfortunately the PTO
continues to spawn never-ending outbreaks
by issuing these patents in the first place.

So the ultimate cure is to eliminate the
disease at its source.

However - there are too many vested interest
blocks to put pressure for real changes at
the PTO - that would sort this mess out.

Notice the PTO gets paid by patents issued,
and has a process that allows examiners just
16 hours to review from start to finish.
And it has got very good at making money,
so it has no incentive to change.  The
bulk of patents - 95%+ - are nothing to do
with inventions at all - but are simply
defending product niches and features.
The big corporations submit thousands of
these a year - that keeps lots of people
employed - and ensures they have a dominant
position - and clogs the system so that
genuine inventions (that < 5%) have to wait
years before they get awarded, so that
products based on them have already
been superceded in the marketplace by
copies and enhancements.

Right now independent inventors
have little incentive to contribute
their real findings - the best invention
is a blackbox that noone really knows
what it does inside - and does need
a patent.  Unfortunately the most
useful inventions are those that
can be most easily copied, and there
is no way of having modest fees paid
to inventors for delivering useful
components - its an all or nothing
situation.

Noone involved in this symbiotic cycle
has any incentive to change it.

What brave senator or congress representative
will voice change, given all the party
contributions from those big companies
benefiting most with all this?

But until that happens we will just continue to
spin our wheels.

Maybe what is needed is an independent
non-profit pressure group, or an
international based effort for common
global standards. 

Cheers, DW.

(Holder of two US software patents).

----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>