[OSGeo-Discuss] Fw: Re: New Google Mapping Patent

[Paulo Marcondes]

2007/1/9, Frank Warmerdam <warmerdam at pobox.com>:

> I am not keen on getting too involved in patent related activities.
>
> For one thing, it tends to be "laywer intensive" which sooner or later will
> mean "expensive".  Second, I suspect that customer oriented businesses like
> Google or Autodesk primarily file such patents for defensive use.  I doubt
> there is much risk of them being used against free software and so effort
> spent fighting them is essentially wasted.
>
> Should we find an open source geospatial project threatened by legal action
> from a patent holder of a baseless patent, I think it would be more likely
> we might get actively involved.

Frank, while I see you point, IIRC from an IP-related talk at the
company I work for (It also does bussiness in the US...) It is much
easier (and cheaper) to invalidate a claim while in the PO than in
court. And that has the benefit of filing prior art with the PO, so it
also acts as a prevention tool - prevents other similar patent claims
being filed.

Gary is probably on a better position to comment on this, since IANAL, etc.

OSGeo could also start talking with PUBPAT, and its interested members
join the effort by Groklaw(?) - building a comprehensive prior art
database.

Some links for your entertaining:
http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20050402193202442#maboutpatent
http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/ahrb/script-ed/vol2-1/park.asp

> Note, I'm speaking for myself, not on behalf of a consensus position of the
> foundation.

Shall we pursue consensus on this? May the board consider this
entering this swamp? Maybe joining with relevant actors?
-- 
Paulo Marcondes = PU1/PU2PIX
-22.915 -42.224 = GG86jc
Debian GNU/Linux = http://rj.debianbrasil.org = http://www.debian.org
http://www.kombato.org - Seja seu próprio guarda-costas