[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug #309257: libpano12: patent problems



On Wednesday 22 June 2005 03.25, Florent Bayle wrote:
[libpano12]
> http://www.virtualproperties.com/noipix/patents.html suggests that there
> is clear prior art in this case. I have taken this link from previous
> discution on debian-legal. But Robert Jordens thinks that :
> "The prior art argument is pretty much irrelevant in our question as long
> as the legal status quo is different and the patent has not been
> challanged."

Wouldn't this be a case where pubpat could be asked to review the patent and 
try to challenge it?  Debian is, after all, quite well-known, and if this 
patent really
 - has prior art and thus should be available, and
 - is enforced aggressively enough that some developers have been scared 
away,
I think pubpat might be interested.

(The two items above were hinted at in this discussion - I'm not familiar 
with the case, just jumping in.)

cheers
-- vbi

-- 
Compatible: Gracefully accepts erroneous data from any source.

Attachment: pgpoCW3rrEQ0b.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: