8 Dec
2005
8 Dec
'05
8:17 p.m.
On Thu, 2005-12-08 at 18:25 -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
On Thu, 2005-12-08 at 14:43 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
> Anyone intersted in further study could easily discover the U.S.
> patent numbers that were originally licensed to NemeSys. (Not Tascam!)
> If someone cannot do that for themselves then they probably could
> figure out someone who does know the numbers and ask so they could
> read the patents for themselves.
The patent was licensed to NemeSys, but it is owned by Conexant.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d…
If the issue really is a patent dispute involving a
patent that is 1) a
software patent and 2) obvious and therefore invalid, wouldn't this be
the first case where a corporation went after a free software project
for software patent infringement? And if this were the case shouldn't
there be a huge uproar going on?
The patent is very obvious - I came up with the same idea about 30
seconds after hearing about the problem of a low latency sampler with
huge samples, and I'm not even particularly clever. I don't know enough
about US patent law to know how complex or original something has to be
in order to be a valid patent, but if I was a US citizen I would
definitely write some angry mails to the patent and trademark office.
--
Lars Luthman
PGP key: http://www.d.kth.se/~d00-llu/pgp_key.php
Fingerprint: FCA7 C790 19B9 322D EB7A E1B3 4371 4650 04C7 7E2E