Thus the patent you describe would make the RAD OMG specification a violation 
of your patent,
since it provides a mechanism to specifically what you say plus a lot more?  
Note that the
RFP for this was issued in February, 1998: 
http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?corbamed/98-02-23.
The result is a specific way to provide the capability you describe in your 
patent in a scalable,
implementable way over a distributed network.

Dave

> ------------Original Message------------
> From: Andrew Ho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "OpenHealth List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, Nov-23-2004 12:54 PM
> Subject: Re: A patent application covering EHRs
>
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Daniel L. Johnson wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 20:29, Tim Churches wrote:
> > > There is some concern here in Australia over a patent application 
> lodged
> > > by the Pharmacy Guild of Australia over some rather generic 
> features of
> > > EHRs.
> >
> > More prior art...
> >
> > Dr. Thomas Payne used WAN technology to distribute his own EHR 
> between
> > his clinic, hospital, and local nursing home in 1990, using a 
> DOS-based
> > system.
> >
> > And, of course, there's the Logician Internet software that 
> maintained a
> > central data repository and served practices over the net, circa
> > 1996-98.
> 
> Dan,
>   But do these prior systems provide the follwing set of functions?
> 
> "comprising the steps of : the consumer causing personal health data to 
> be
> stored in a secure repository, said repository requiring authentication 
> of
> the consumer's identity before the consumer is provided access to the
> repository; the consumer selecting items of personal health data to 
> share
> and identifying a health care provider, or class of health care 
> providers,
> to whom access will be provided for those items of personal health 
> data;
> a health care provider providing authentication of their identity to 
> the
> consumer's secure repository and being provided access to those items 
> of
> personal health data of the consumer for which the health care provider
> has been identified for sharing; the health care provider using the
> personal health data of the consumer to determine health care advice or
> the provision of a health care service for the consumer; and the health
> care provider recording details of the consultation and the advice or
> service provided to the consumer in the secure repository of health 
> data
> of the consumer."
> Quoted from Claim 1 of
> http://v3.espacenet.com/textclam?CY=ep&LG=en&F=4&IDX=WO02073456&DB=EPODOC&QPN=WO02073456
> 
> Prior art that do not "read on" the claims of the patent are not 
> relevant
> to this discusssion. Specifically, subset implementation does not
> infringe a patent. This means if we build software that does not do all
> the steps spelled out above, it does not infringe.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Andrew
> ---
> Andrew P. Ho, M.D.
> OIO: Open Infrastructure for Outcomes
> www.TxOutcome.Org
> 
> 


Reply via email to