Richard A. Smith wrote: The big boys might fight amongst themselves about this stuff at the moment, but if free software ever starts to seriously threaten them they could very quickly forget their differences, gang up, and start licensing the patents to/from each other. Does a patent get stronger if you're actually earning money from it? Simon Jenkins (Bristol, UK)

-----Original Message----- From: linux-audio-dev-admin(a)music.columbia.edu [mailto:linux-audio-dev-admin@music.columbia.edu]On Behalf Of Simon Jenkins Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 11:26 AM To: linux-audio-dev(a)music.columbia.edu Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Gigasampler vs Halion PR war <SNIP> Does a patent get stronger if you're actually earning money from it? Simon Jenkins (Bristol, UK) <SNIP> Simon, Yes, sort of, but it is not required that you earn money immediately. When you earn money from a patent you establish the value of the patent. Should you then discover someone infringing on it, your monetary entitlements in court are better defined. There are also issues, in some cases, about 'shipping' a product that has patented property in it to establish your ownership. Also pertinent to the discussion, it is my understanding (and likely not to be a popular one here I think) that if you were going to work on a piece of software for the purpose of making money then you must license the patent BEFORE beginning work or you are, at least in the US, potentially subject to legal prosecution should the holder of the patent discover what you are doing. I have run into this issue a number of times in my career when starting technical projects. We always do some sort of assessment of the risks in this area. Interestingly, my understanding of US patent law says that if you do NOT intend to make money from your work, now or at anytime in the future, then you are allowed to develop things that infringe on patents as a private individual for the purpose of your own education. This is obviously an interesting area as many open-source programmers fit this model, and as I understand it again, precisely why the software that broke the DVD code scared the US entertainment industry so much. Our Legislative Branch then fell prey to US business interests and created law specifically to address these issues with respect to digitally formatted property. Even though it might have been 'legally legal' at the time, many people believed it was not 'morally legal' to copy and distribute copyrighted material even when there was no intention to make money. I basically agree with that position, but am terribly disappointed that there is (currently) no provision for making your own backup copies of copyrighted material. That is a real mistake and I think it will fall in the next few years. In the spirit of full disclosure, I am not a lawyer, am a multiple patent holder in the US and Japan (not sure about the EU) and am only speaking from experience. My opinions are my own and do not represent any form of legal guidance. Cheers, Mark

patent from Patent holder?? GET HIM! Good thing you didn't post on slashdot. Taybin ******** LOL!! Well, my name is on a number of patents, including one (#6,457,152) accepted by the Patent Office a few weeks ago. (Also post-1996 - #6,356,099, #6,240,480, Pre-1996 I just don't remember, but there were a few.) However, I own no rights to any of them as when we sign employment agreements here in the US we sign away all right to anything we invent while being paid by the company we work for. Nice 'eh? ;) Taybin - I pick my fights carefully. I don't even *visit* slashdot from a computer that knows my name! ;-)