Nils Faerber writes: > >Isn't this already a problem? >>From what I know especially in the US patent system you are *forced* to >actively defend your patent, i.e. if you get to know that someone uses >your patent and is not paying you roayalties (or you get an alternative >commercial advantage like cross licensing) you have to sue him. If you >do not do so the patent can be revoked.
IANAL, but -- no. You seem to be confusing patents with trademarks -- you can lose a trademark by failing to actively defend it; a patent can't be revoked on those grounds (now, if you let somebody use your patent for a decade before you sue them, you could end up getting far less damages than you would have otherwise. But that's a different issue than losing the patent). >And you have to collect royalties since the patent system only cares >about businesses, i.e. the sole purpose of patents is to make money from >it. Not using it to make money by either sublicensing or self-use of the >IP will constitue non active use of the patent and is also a reason for >revocation. Again, no. There is no requirement that you charge royalties. >So even if you have the intend of not sueing you might be forced to >either sue others and/or collect license fees. >The expressed intend not to make money from the patent could already be >a reason for not accepting it. > >So imagine someone else using the OpenMoko software on another device >with some of your patented parts in it. You would be forced to sue this >person/company/whatever. >This is not what we you/we want. It's also not the law. _______________________________________________ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community