Re: ARC patent

Nicolai Tufar wrote:
> Second, a pending patent is not a granted patent,
> one is not infringing anything by distributing
> technology based in a pending patent.

Given the patents the USPTO has been granting in recent times, if a
patent is pending, it's almost certainly going to be granted.
Especially if it comes from an entity such as IBM (the USPTO wouldn't
want to upset its biggest paying customers, would it?), and especially
if it's on something that isn't completely trivial.

For that reason, I think it's quite reasonable to treat any pending
patent from IBM as if it were a granted patent. The only way I could
see the patent not being granted is if some large corporate entity
like Microsoft filed an objection. That's possible, I suppose, but
not something I would want to count on. But objections raised by
small entities such as individuals will almost certainly be dropped on
the floor, because such entities don't matter to the USPTO (or the
rest of the government, for that matter), unless they are flush with
cash.

> IBM can NEVER sue customers for using infringing
> code before first informing them of infringement and
> giving reasonable time to upgrade to uninfringing
> version.

This is the United States. People (and especially large corporations)
can sue anybody for anything anytime they wish. And they do. Reason
doesn't enter into it. Only money. See the SCO debacle for proof,
and note that they're not suing in any other countries.

If I sound bitter and cynical, well, there's lots of good reason for
it. You need only look around, at least if you're in the U.S.

--
Kevin Brown kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com