So, if someone implements a Doubly-linked List, then does Microsoft get to sue that entity twice?
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Russel Winder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 2010-10-10 at 12:20 +0200, Fabrizio Giudici wrote: >> On 10/10/10 10:55 , Henning Hoefer wrote: >> > Note that the article linked in Fabrizios posting is from 2004. Did >> > Microsoft actually sue anyone over this patent in the last 6 years? >> But this is not relevant. I mean, it's clear that this kind of patent is >> not filed because Microsoft doesn't want that other IDEs manage 'TODO'. >> It's just a weapon for a patent war triggered by another goal. > > I suspect it is relevant. If there are doubts about whether a patent > remains enforceable it looses its power as a weapon in the > cross-licencing game. Having waited 6 years and not enforced its patent > on what appear to be obvious violations, courts may deem the patent > waived, which makes it unusable in the patent game. > > But then I am not a lawyer. > > -- > Russel. > ============================================================================= > Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:[email protected] > 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: [email protected] > London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder > -- Amarjeet Singh Phone: +91-98712-76661 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
