Excerpts from 1_Place's message of Tue Nov 10 16:05:47 +1100 2009: > > My previous rant was after attending "Raising the awareness of > intellectual property amongst the business community" which stated: > "This forum will feature three expert speakers providing their > perspectives on the topic above"; however, no one seemed to think that > there was a problem with Patents & IP nor where there any suggestions > that the views such as those reflected by SiliconBeach existed! > > My thoughts were that there was an elephant in the room! > > Jay - thanks for your thoughts - it should be scalable but alas, it > currently is not: the legal costs are so very high to revoke or defend > a patent that it often is a game for empowered. Possibly a Patent > Court that efficiently resolves patent disputes would be beneficial? > or just more red tape? > > Patents for small player are valuable as negotiation tools and can > lead to a valuable return when pursued (from the matters that I have > been involved in it has been worthwhile). Also, as yet I have not > worked with a client that has not valued their patent highly ... but > this is not the full spectrum of experience. > > Richard - thanks also for your thoughts & links (alas, not read yet > but I will): > > The patent library works for me because: > 1) it is free: many academic journals you have to pay a subscription > for. The contributor pays the costs to enter material into the patent > system, not the reader; and
Are you suggesting that it's free to publish get a patent? Is it even free to see all patents (I realise there are some sites that allow you to browse patents but is that all patents). > 2) it has a set format (objective, background, problem to be > overcome ...) and is most often translated into English, so you can > search it. I know of no other library that has hundreds of years of > entry in the same format. They may be literally translated into English but I would argue that it's not possible for a layman to *understand* them. Software patents haven't been around for hundreds of years. Please don't get me wrong I'm not adverse to the concept of a patent system, my main problem the current implementation (I'm mainly talking about US patent law, I realise that the Australian patents are slightly saner) and software patents in general. > The Creative Commons license (see > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons_license) > is for copyright. I understand that but surely it's a legally binding document clearly stating your idea and under what conditions you can use it. After all software is released under a copyright of some description. > As for Open Source - I am a great supporter of it. The patent > database does not stop people putting information into the public > domain and is often the means for people adding information into the > public domain since the decision to collect a royalty is up to the > applicant and the opportunity to collect a royalty is for a limited > period of time: http://1plaw.com/1P/expert/expert_wizard.php?area_id=12 So can I add an idea to the patent database for free and put it in the public domain without hiring a solicitor? Surely there are other ways of putting something into the public domain (I don't really subscribe to your view of the patent database as a library)? rgh > Thanks for your thoughts - there is truth in what you are expressing; > however, in the circus governing IP policy it seems that no-one has > noticed the elephant in the room! > > On Nov 10, 1:13 pm, 1_Place <drmichaelba...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks again > > > > I will reply specifically to your thoughts a little later - I believe > > there are many things wrong with the patent system at the moment > > - however, the governors of the system do not hear the wisdom of the > > crowds*: > > > > I have just come back from a talk with with IP Australia and IPTA (the > > Institute of Patent & Trade mark Attorneys): > > It seems that the outcome of these talks appeared to focus on: > > 1) people don't understand IP; > > 2) a little bit of knowledge is dangerous; and > > 3) we are doing so much (as we were walked through the website of > > these organisations) ... I was dismayed! > > > > There was no debate in these talks. Further, the same talks could have > > taken place a decade ago. > > > > Consequently, change will have to come from the users of IP, not the > > directors of it! > > > > Regards > > > > 1Place > > *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds > > > > On Nov 10, 12:37 pm, Richard Heycock <r...@roughage.com.au> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Excerpts from 1_Place's message of Tue Nov 10 10:04:26 +1100 2009: > > > > > > Thanks for your thoughts: > > > > > > There is a lot is anger towards patents which I would very much like > > > > to unravel - > > > > > > I see the patent system as a library that has a standard process for > > > > recording information, for which anyone at anytime can take > > > > information from that library - however, in approximately 8% of cases > > > > a royalty will have to be paid to the inventor/applicant. > > > > > You may well think of the patent system "... as a library that has a > > > standard process for recording information ..." but, surely, a much > > > better place for such information is journals and libraries not to > > > mention the Internet. > > > > > The reality is that large companies use it to stifle innovation and > > > protect their interests, usually at the cost of the people using the > > > software. See: > > > > > http://www.ecis.eu/documents/Finalversion_Consumerchoicepaper.pdf > > > > > Particularly section III/B. > > > > > > If you can describe your invention and you do not want to seek > > > > royalties from it you can add it to the library as a Statutory > > > > Invention Registration see > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Statutory_Invention_Regist... > > > > > Surely putting your invention in the public domain or publishing it a > > > using, say, Creative Commons license or the GFDL would achieve the same > > > thing? (Caveat INAL!). > > > > > > The sharing of knowledge is critically important for our growth so we > > > > can "stand on the shoulders of others" from which I learnt from my > > > > many years in research. > > > > > Absolutely but I do not think putting it into a system that has been > > > shown, on numerous occasions, to be open to abuse is a good idea. > > > > > I tend to think "stand on those who threaten our dominance" might be a > > > better quote! > > > > > rgh > > > > > > We need to deconstruct the reason(s) why we "protest so much" > > > > > > Let me build an tool to empirically find out what causes angst about > > > > the patent system as an empirical study (less dogma more karma!) > > > > > > "Can we fix it"? Famous words by Bob the builder : ) > > > > > > Regards > > > > 1_Place > > > >www.1p.com.au > > > > > > On Nov 10, 8:13 am, TinMan <jtinber...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi Elias, > > > > > > > I run a small Aussie "start-up", now into our seventh year. We do > > > > > SaaS for the facilities management industry. As a small company we > > > > > have some very large customers - Mirvac, Goodman, Spotless ... which > > > > > makes patent protection all the more important. (stops the internal > > > > > IT departments of these companies attempting to duplicate our > > > > > solutions). We hold 2 patents, and have 1 pending. Each one has cost > > > > > about 5k to 8k to register in Aus. We use Watermark in North Ryde. > > > > > > > I will say that the value of patents is questioned by VC's and is > > > > > often more of a cost than an asset. However, it does make getting the > > > > > R&D tax rebate easier, and access to other funds. In the end, you > > > > > need to be able to back your IP rights and have the finance to defend > > > > > them. > > > > > > > My point is they are not just for large companies, and in our case > > > > > have proved worth the investment. > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > Jon Tinbergwww.valoremsystems.com > > > > > > > On Nov 9, 7:26 am, Elias Bizannes <elias.bizan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > <rant>Software patents hurt the world. The big companies all have > > > > > > agreements > > > > > > with each other where it's a "we won't sue you if you don't sue us" > > > > > > because > > > > > > they all inevitably infringe on each others patents and the rapid > > > > > > innovation > > > > > > occuring wouldn't happen without such agreements. All patents are > > > > > > doing are > > > > > > preventing upstarts from coming into the world, as the big > > > > > > companies can > > > > > > shoot them out of the water and entrench their dominance. The > > > > > > reality is, > > > > > > most patent cases get thrown out of court due to particulars, and > > > > > > it's a > > > > > > matter of who has the most money in the bank to sustain the > > > > > > fight.</rant> > > > > > > > > But kudo's for trying to think differently. I think the most value > > > > > > service > > > > > > providers can add is by trying to grow the ecosystem. If you > > > > > > actively help > > > > > > companiess starting and growing, they will ineventiably need > > > > > > services. > > > > > > Forming the relationships early on is how you secure future > > > > > > profitability. > > > > > > It doesn't cost anything to have a coffee with someone and give > > > > > > them advice. > > > > > > That in my eyes, is the most value you could add - and that > > > > > > benefits you > > > > > > more than it costs. > > > > > > > > Elias Bizanneshttp://eliasbizannes.com > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 12:15 PM, 1_Place <drmichaelba...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Silicon Beach > > > > > > > > > Reading the LifeGuard paper: > > > > > > >http://www.siliconbeachaustralia.org/lifeguard/ > > > > > > > & <http://www.siliconbeachaustralia.org/lifeguard/%0A&;> > > > > > > > considering what > > > > > > > can we do to help, we thought that we would seek > > > > > > > suggestions from Silicon Beach for ways to improve start up > > > > > > > access to > > > > > > > legal and patent attorney services. > > > > > > > > > Our belief is that there are other obstacles that prevent starts > > > > > > > up > > > > > > > from having a easy path to success, one of which is the cost of IP > > > > > > > protection - and in particular patent protection! > > > > > > > > > We would really appreciate any thoughts on how we can offer legal > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > patent attorney services and still survive ourselves. Is there a > > > > > > > way > > > > > > > that we could help IT start ups to secure patent protection for > > > > > > > new > > > > > > > inventions and not go under ourselves? > > > > > > > > > One way is to provide help for startups to put in their own patent > > > > > > > applications. We have an initial teaching aid for patents at: > > > > > > >http://www.1place.com.au/expert/expert_wizard.php?area_id=12 > > > > > > > > > Please let us know other ways that we could change the way legal > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > attorney services are offered to help make Australia more > > > > > > > competitive. > > > > > > > Any thoughts on this? > > > > > > > > > We are sure that there are good alternative business models worth > > > > > > > trying; therefore, we are looking for your input. > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > 1p.com.au- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon Beach Australia mailing list. Guidelines on discussion: http://tr.im/ujKF No lurkers! It is expected that you introduce yourself: http://tr.im/ujMm To post to this group, send email to silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to silicon-beach-australia+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
