[email protected] said: > Actually, I think the developing company does have patents on some of the > receiver implementations. You can probably design around them.
What's the fine print in this area? Does NIST have any PR blurbs covering patents? Common sense, politics, and patents makes for a horrible mess. I think I'd be happy if the developing company got a head start. That could be a reasonable trade for a lot of engineering/support during testing. I think I'd be unhappy if they got a patent on a receiving technique that was obvious to one skilled in the art (or whatever the magic patent phrase is) after you looked at the description of the modulation/encoding technique. That's assuming that NIST didn't get a broad free-to-use license for that patent for listening to WWVB. Another way to view this mess is the general topic of patents in standards. WWVB isn't in the same class of "standards" as IETF/IEEE/ANSI/ISO type documents, but given that it's a government monopoly, it's as good (or better) than any other standard. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
