[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [chairs] Of un-patents and un-inventions
Gabe, The earlier efforts had somewhat different focuses - and also were disconnected - not related to a specific community - and especially a community with direct linkage to the PTO in the way OASIS members are. I also am seeing that the need is the learn from the past efforts - and particularly to produce a template with wording and scope that does directly tie it to the patent process and make it relevant. Of course that is easy to say - difficult to do. However - we are travelling down this path - and I expect to be able to draft something shortly that can be peer-reviewed for effectiveness. Wording is one thing, another is build relevance through community awareness. If noone chooses to do this - of course the USPTO can simply ignore it. Also if patent applications occur that reference the resource site - then the USPTO will have to look at it and know about it. Clearly we have to do more and different from what has already gone before. Creative use of carrots and sticks is anticipated! Thanks, DW ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wachob, Gabe" <gwachob@visa.com> To: "David Webber (XML)" <david@drrw.info>; "Chairs OASIS" <chairs@lists.oasis-open.org> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 12:05 PM Subject: RE: [chairs] Of un-patents and un-inventions David- Can you explain to me how your proposal is different than sites (and there are several, last time I looked) like the one you mention? Why is the PTO going to pay any more attention to this effort? While I do think it would be interesting for OASIS pursue something like this, I'd hate for it to be ignored just like previous efforts. -Gabe > -----Original Message----- > From: David Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info] > Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 8:19 AM > To: Chairs OASIS > Subject: Re: [chairs] Of un-patents and un-inventions > > Elysa, > > I'm open to better suggestions! > > BTW - seems like the patent approach to this is > http://www.researchdisclosure.com/ > but again this IMHO falls into the same bear trap we are > trying to avoid - > eg - > this just sucks you down into the morass that is the USPTO - > we're trying to > ensure > we stay away from all that. > > I've had a suggest of other terms like "open invention", or > "freely reusable > idea". > > I also think we need "obvious and self-evident" in there too.... > > Thanks, DW > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Elysa Jones" <ejones@warningsystems.com> > To: "David Webber (XML)" <david@drrw.info>; "Chairs OASIS" > <chairs@lists.oasis-open.org> > Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 10:57 AM > Subject: Re: [chairs] Of un-patents and un-inventions > > > > Except for the name, I think this is the best idea I have > heard yet wrt > IPR! > > Cheers, > > Elysa Jones, EM-TC > > > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]