From ramon@jl1.quim.ucm.es  Tue May 22 18:27:44 2001
From: ramon@jl1.quim.ucm.es (Ram'on Garc'ia Fern'andez)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 19:27:44 +0200
Subject: [Patents] My personal opinion.
In-Reply-To: <200105221652.MAA13266@world.std.com>; from srctran@world.std.com on Tue, May 22, 2001 at 12:52:55PM -0400
References: <Pine.LNX.4.31.0105221049520.5924-100000@querty.oas.a2e.de> <050d01c0e2c3$8083df40$6401a8c0@flint1.mi.home.com> <200105221652.MAA13266@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <20010522192744.A13485@jl1.quim.ucm.es>

On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 12:52:55PM -0400, Gregory Aharonian wrote:
> Ramon writes:
> >I think that the incentive of the monopoly should be balanced with the
> >research work behind it.
> 
> That is probably as difficult and subjective to determine as obviousness.

At this moment, it was not my intention to suggest a statutory
requirement, but rather what the spirit of the law should be.  On the
other hand, a requirement of a reasonable work behind is not perfect.
However, it is impossible that it is worse that the present situation.

I would find strange that a researcher does not have to write an
annual report to the institution where he works. So having to write a
similar report of obtaining a patent would not be a big overhead.

Ramon


