Re: [Patents] Microsoft to pay .5 bn for license to extend web-browser

[Hartmut Pilch <phm@a2e.de>]

> >... I wonder why the Univ. of California didn't file it at the EPO.
> >... Were they deterred by Art 52 or by the EPO's "technical
> >... contribution" junktalk?
>
> Probably neither of those reasons.  Most of the potential licensing and
> litigation monies that Eolas can earn by asserting their patents will
> come from companies in the United States (Microsoft, AOL, etc.).  Any
> agreements can or will include their European operations enough that
> having the European patent would not help them earn that much more money.
> Also, as a startup years ago, Eolas had to manage their patenting dollars.
> Getting a patent in Europe is still very expensive because of the language
> translation problem (a much more effective deterrent than Art 52).  So by
> avoiding spending a lot of money at a time when they had little money,
> they give up some money later on.

That explanation makes sense, thanks.

> The logic makes much sense for European software companies - maximize their
> patenting dollars by applying for a US software patent.  But it is much
> easier for European companies can do so if they can first file for a
> software patent in Europe and then file a child patent application in the
> United States.  The current nonsense about software patents in Europe,
> and the extra hurdles European companies have to jump over, puts European
> companies at a disadvantage.

This is an argument for unlimited patentability.  I find it rather
inconclusive (Xavier wrote why), and it has nothing to do with this
thread.  But it makes sense from the viewpoint of a patent buster.  When
there is no more any limit on patentability, prior art becomes all the
more valuable.  Both for the attacked and, as apparently in this case, the
attackers.

-- 
Hartmut Pilch, FFII & Eurolinux Alliance              tel. +49-89-18979927
Protecting Innovation against Patent Inflation       http://swpat.ffii.org/
160,000 votes 2000 firms against software patents    http://noepatents.org/