[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
- From: PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>
- To: Gregory Aharonian <srctran@world.std.com>
- Cc: <patents@aful.org>
- Subject: Re: [Patents] JPEG et al patented in US and EU
- Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 01:57:25 +0200 (CEST)
> This JPEG patent will neither stand the test of time or the scrutiny
> of some good patent litigators.
Did Forgent forge the documents which it uses to tell the stock exchange
that it has already received 65 USD of license fees from this patent?
Why then are Sony not speaking up and refuting the claim that they paid 15
mn USD in license fees?
Does Sony lack good litigators? I remember them putting up some hard and
successful patent fights in court.
> Any concerns are much ado about nothing.
Can you show us some prior art or give some analysis of the weakness of
the claims?
Even that alone would not be enough to turn this into "much ado about
nothing", but it would be very useful anyway.
> By the way, what is the number of the EPO version of the patent?
Forgot, noted on
http://swpat.ffii.org/patents/effects/jpeg/
--
Hartmut Pilch, FFII & Eurolinux Alliance tel. +49-89-12789608
Protecting Innovation against Patent Inflation http://swpat.ffii.org/
120,000 signatures against software patents http://www.noepatents.org/
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.
(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)