On Jul 16, 11:42 am, "Phil Da Lick!"
<phil_the_lickREMOVETHISSPAMT...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Rex Ballard wrote:
> > The bigger problem is that so many software patents have been
> > fraudulently obtained by unethical lawyers and ignorant (ill informed)
> > "developers" who think that they have invented something because it
> > hasn't been patented before - even though it may have been released as
> > OSS or Public Domain source 30 years earlier.
>
> All in an attempt to build up an "arsenal" which none of the big boys
> will ever use against each other. Which therefore can only ever serve
> one purpose: as a barrier to entry against the next big thing. Imagine
> what would have happened if M$ had had a massive patent portfolio
> including search and recognised google when it was on the way up.
Remember, defensive patents are primarily used to keep some ambulance
chaser from trying to extort $millions from the big boys, just because
they have deep pockets and a whiplash lawyer can paper them to
insanity with discovery motions, motions, petitions, and other legal
maneuvering, even when the case is groundless. I think IBM stated in
court that they have already spent over $300 million defending
themselves against SCO, including the research to meet all of the
disclosure requests. SCO has spent about $30 million requesting all
of those disclosures, and nearly all of their claims were dismissed,
in fact ALL of the claims that IBM requested to have dismissed were
dismissed. The remaining claims are claims that IBM can prove were
not only fraudulent, but can actually prove that SCO was fraudulently
claiming ownership of IBM intellectual property.
The main reason IBM didn't settle was because it would have opened
Linux distributors, Linux customers, and Linux contributors to
lawsuits based on fraudulent claims. IBM was protecting them. I'm
sure SCO would have been happy to get $300 million in a cash
settlement. Instead, SCO is on the verge of bankruptcy, and IBM is
attempting to make a case for getting the court to order deeper
pockets, including Microsoft, to pay the damages and legal costs IBM
has incurred.
|
|
