Hardware security in PCs to accompany new Windows

[William O'Higgins]

On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 10:04:06PM -0400, Srinivasan Krishnan wrote:
>On Thu, 2005-05-19 at 18:40 -0400, James Knott wrote:
>> psema4 wrote:
>
>> 
>> My understanding, is that you can't get patents on prior art. ... 

I don't wish to rain on anyone's parade, but the way the patent system
is supposed to work and the way that it does work are not the same.  The
USPTO does not properly review patent applications - you can patent
prior art all day long.  Contesting patents places huge burdens on the
party that does not hold the patent, and the patent-holders are usually
better capitalized than everyone else, and can win cases by attrition.

The clearest method to rectify this state is not contesting bogus patents
one at a time, but using political pressure to institute patent reform.
There is a problem with this too - the better-funded lobby is the one on
the side of the patent-holders.  Still, there is hope for patent reform,
and grass-roots pressure and participating in the pro-reform lobby is
the best course of action.

As for whether US patents affect us here in Canada, the answer is a
resounding yes.  RIM just paid out $450M USD to a patent-holder in the
US.  The patent was completely crap IMNSHO, but that doesn't mean
diddly.  $450M USD is cheaper than an appeal, because RIM would not be
able to get a stay of judgement, and thus would have to pull the
Blackberry off the market in the US - obviously not feasible - until the
appeal was heard - in ten years.
-- 

yours,

William

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/legacy/attachments/20050530/b2158a2a/attachment.sig>