[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]

(074db819ec% subtitle %074db819ec)


(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)chronological(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Thread(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) 
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Reply to sender(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)to list(074db819ec%END%074db819ec)

(074db819ec% IF user.email == 'ehj@cleosan.com' || is_owner %074db819ec) (074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)

Davide Dozza wrote:
Simo, do you think we can try to invalid such patent?
What are the precedures we should follow in order to demonstrate this is not prior art or better this is not patentable?

For a single patent I'd suggest you have a look at FFII opposition to the amazon patent.

   http://swpat.ffii.org/news/04/amaz0125/index.en.html

Otherwise, I would like a more massive action. Like collecting all patents with "computer program product"-claims and submit a general objection. Like for example this one:

   "11. A computer program product for execution by a general purpose
   computer for providing state information in a stateless data
   communication protocol, said computer program product including
   instructions for making said general purpose computer perform the
   steps of the method of one of claims 1 to 10."

   http://gauss.bacon.su.se/EP/1/0/EP1081612.html#claim

As well as politically defeat software patents through legislation.

//Erik




(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.

(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)