Re: [ITPOLITIK] patent givet til MS hvor der eksisterer prior art!

[donald_j_axel <sslug@sslug>]

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 21:52:54 +0100
Michael wrote:

> Hej alle,
> 
> Det er nu dokumenteret, at USPTO udsteder patenter, hvor der
> findes prior art. Er det ikke en oplysning, vi kan bruge i
> debatten mod det nuværende patentsystem?
> http://www.cs.fsu.edu/~engelen/soap.html
> 
> "
> June 2005:
> 
> A recent patent granted to Microsoft on "XML Serialization" has
> caused some commotion. Relax. The basis of the gSOAP software
> pre-dates Microsoft's XML serialization patent and is thus
> considered prior art: Gunjan Gupta's Master's project conducted
> in my research lab implemented an XML serialization algorithm in
> a compiler we developed for C, based on a SOAP and XML mapping
> that I developed in 1999. The project report TR-001205 was filed
> in the Department of Computer Science in 2000 way before
> Microsoft's patent was filed. So it seems to me that this patent
> is utterly unenforcable, also given that other prior art exists.
> Shows that it is good we lead rather than follow (the Web
> services technology). "

   Det er et interessant link, og FSU.EDU har link videre rundt
vedrørende MS patentet. Jeg synes, at det er et oplagt sted at
gribe fat for at få ændret politikken på dette område.

   Jeg synes jeg husker nogen indvendinger (i dette forum) mod at
kritisere fejl-patenter, fordi man så skulle kunne tage momentum
(fremdrift) ud af anti-patent sagen. Opponenterne mente at den
rensede tilbageværende patentmasse ville være nemmere at
argumentere for. Det tror jeg nu ikke.

   Jeg tror mere på en direkte argumentation mod de "tåbelige"
patenter kombineret med en filosofisk argumentation om at det
tjener alle parter at frigive viden i stedet for at tilbageholde
den.

   Der er dog et tåleligt kompromis: Patent-pools kombineret med
anti-monopol lovgivning og bøder.

   Der har vist været enkelte eksempler på tilbageviste patenter,
men der er også problemer. Det umulige Acacia patent kunne ikke
bare annulleres med henvisning til at dem, der udtænkte de første
data-pakketransporter i 60'erne havde visioner om transport af
billedstrømme på det grundlag til mange kommercielle formål.

   Også dette taler imidlertid efter min mening for at man går
direkte på og siger at man ikke kan retfærdiggøre patenter på
"forretningsmetoder".


   Her er lidt fra den artikel, der henvises til fra Michael's
link
(http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/applications/0,39020384,39200380,00.htm)
   


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The patent, which was granted by the US patent office on Tuesday,
        is for XML serialisation and deserialisation -- the conversion of a
        programming object into an XML file and vice versa. It was
        criticised by software developers as it is a basic programming
        concept that is essential for applications using XML to share
        data.

        But Microsoft denied that any of its patents are of low quality
        and claimed that its patents have been praised in research
        studies.

        "As a result of our industry leading commitment to research and
        development, Microsoft maintains thousands of patents," said the
        spokesperson. "Studies routinely rank our innovations among the
        most significant across any industry. A study by the Massachusetts
        Institute of Technology in 2003, which provided an overall
        assessment of Microsoft's intellectual property, found that
        Microsoft continues to develop relevant patents and gave us one of
        the highest scores on the list of technology companies in that
        category."

        Microsoft did not provide more details on the MIT report, and
        didn't say why it believes the XML patent is innovative. 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
donald_j_axel donax snabela get2net.dk -- http://d-axel.dk/