On Monday, 1 September 2014 at 19:12:05 UTC, Russel Winder via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Mon, 2014-09-01 at 09:43 +0000, monarch_dodra via
Digitalmars-d
wrote:
[…]
Isn't there some way to "open source" a patent? Or at least,
make some sort of formal publication that this was invented,
and may not be patented by someone else?
No. What you hint at is "prior art" and is a proper defence
against (the
dark arts and) the award of a patent. At least in the UK. USPTO
and
increasingly EUPO award well formed patents and do not care
about prior
art. They treat this as an issue for the courts not for them.
Thus unless you have a lawyer who can be heard, you are cannon
fodder to be milked for royalties.
I think that you are a little pessimistic about that, yes, that's
the trend, but prior art still is relevant today: I'm about to
reply to an action of the USPTO regarding a patent filed by my
company in 2004, and the examiner keep objecting every time,
arguing about new improbable prior-arts documentation every
time...
Just because you don't want to "lock down" your inventions,
doesn't mean they are free to take...
In the "first to file" USA patent system, yes they are.
Unless they are described in a form that let them available to
the public (not counting the grace period...)
Then again, it takes a certain kind of corporate greed to try
to put a patent on things we'd have never thought of as
"inventions".
Aren't corporate and greed synonyms?
Sometimes they are synonyms for "research" also...
Did we patent UFCS yet? It's an invention.
How about CTFE? That seems like a *huge* invention?
What about generic tuples? No language I know of uses these.
Static if? Let's patent that too while we're at it.
In the USA, if you have a lawyer, yes do it. You might get away
with it in the EU as well.
"First to file not first to invent" – by the corporations for
the
corporations. This should tell you everything you need to know
about technological innovation in the USA.
Good luck with it! ;-P
--
Paolo Invernizzi
