RE: Patent fun

["Mike Bailey" <mike.bailey () sunbladesecurity com>]

I really should go back and read this entire thread but considering what I
have followed here are my questions and ramblings on the matter:

Would this hypothetical database store an abstract of the idea, possibly the
typical information found in patent applications as well as code snippets?
Would there be a small fee for each submission?

I assume the submitter would get a hash for what they submitted as well as a
key to allow them access to it for later inspection or revision.

It would be great for a legal person to chime in on what would actually make
it through litigation. I bet the court's version of obviousness and
originality routinely differ from what the submitters would generally
describe.  My concern is that Billy-the-coder submits an idea but leaves out
most of the legal detail or fails to articulate himself correctly. That
would simply chum the waters for an attorney from a company like, say,
Santa Cruz something, therefore he might loose rights to his original idea
by simply not understanding the legal requirements for it being contested in
court.





> -----Original Message-----
> From: dailydave-bounces () lists immunitysec com 
> [mailto:dailydave-bounces () lists immunitysec com] On Behalf Of dave
> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 6:06 PM
> To: Andrew Hintz ( Drew )
> Cc: annalee () eff org; dailydave () lists immunitysec com
> Subject: Re: [Dailydave] Patent fun
>
> This is a really good point. It doesn't necessarally have to 
> be searchable. It can be expensive. For example, the EFF 
> could charge 50 dollars per minute to a 28.8 modem connection 
> that allows consecutive viewings of pages where the data was 
> listed. This would make it "non searchable" by the public, 
> but still prior art when the EFF needs it, since it is 
> publicly accessible.
>
> This thread is archived at:
> http://lists.immunitysec.com/pipermail/dailydave/2004-July/000680.html
>
> Dave Aitel
> Immunity, Inc.
>
>
> Andrew Hintz ( Drew ) wrote:
>
> > In general prior art has to be public:
> > http://www.iusmentis.com/patents/priorart/
> >
> >  
> >
> > > You know one thing that would solve all this software patenting 
> > > nonsense? A database app anyone could submit to, which 
> would store and 
> > > timestamp any idea you wanted to send it, occasionally submitting 
> > > hashes to the NY Times or at the bottom of mailing list emails (to 
> > > verify timestamps). However, this database would not be 
> searchable by 
> > > the public. This way, companies would spend lots of money to get 
> > > software patents, and then when they tried to sue someone, 
> that person 
> > > could hire the EFF (as trustees) to search the database for 
> prior art. 
> > > The idea here is to make the system self-regulating -  to put a 
> > > negative price pressure on patents, because most patents will get 
> > > overturned easily based on prior art in the database.
> > >
> > > -dave
> > >    
> >
> >  
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dailydave mailing list
> Dailydave () lists immunitysec com
> http://www.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave

_______________________________________________
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave () lists immunitysec com
http://www.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave