[OSGeo-Discuss] Patent for feature of paper map.

Fri Aug 7 11:11:58 PDT 2009

Experienced web mapping experts that are also patent lawyers? Good luck
finding one.

(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically
disclosed or described as set forth in section
102<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode35/usc_sec_35_00000102----000-.html>of
this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be
patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would
have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having
ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains.
Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention
was made. [1]

It just says "to a person having ordinary skill in the art". I don't believe
the law is so foolish as to expect everyone to double-dip in their
professions.

1. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_35_00000103----000-.html

- bri

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:59 AM, Michael P. Gerlek <mpg at lizardtech.com>wrote:

> <note>
> While I have no absolutely no familiarity with the patent in question,
> something I've said here before perhaps bears occasional repeating:
>
> Patent and IP law is a very deep and complex subject.  The vast majority of
> us laypersons are not qualified to read and evaluate patent claims; what is
> reported in the popular press is often a very watered-down or simplistic
> interpretation of what is actually being claimed.  Some patent claims do
> indeed turn out to be riddled through with "obvious" prior art, but in order
> to really know that typically requires one to be experienced in the field of
> use *and* have thorough understanding of the legal language used in the
> claim constructions.
>
> By all means we should all continue to bring down bogus patent attempts,
> but we in doing so we all need to be careful of making any hasty or
> unfounded allegations.
> </note>
>
> -mpg (ianal)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Bill Thoen
> Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 7:14 AM
> To: OSGeo Discussions
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Patent for feature of paper map.
>
> You might be surprised what people might be able to get away with,
> though. There's been repeated attempts to patent "web mapping" for
> example, and if it wasn't for the efforts of a few dedicated people,
> there would now be patents in both Britain and the USA on displaying
> maps over the web. But the threat is not dead yet, believe it or not,
> and it may culminate in a battle between Microsoft and Google sometime
> in the near future. Check out Daniel Morissette's blog entry for Feb 21,
> 2009, "Microsoft Patents the Map" at http://www.systemed.net/blog/?p=68.
> If Microsoft really uses the Multimap patent to put the bite on Google,
> then you can bet your bippy that it'll affect your web mapping business
> too.
>
> If reading that article brings your blood to a righteous boil, and you
> want to know more about who really invented web mapping, see Carl Reed's
> 2004 article, "Intellectual Property, Patents, and Web Mapping:
> Historical Perspective" at
> http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=28360.
>
> - Bill Thoen
> GISnet - www.gisnet.com
>
> Brian Russo wrote:
> > I've seen legends similar to that before; afraid I can't offer
> > anything solid in terms of prior art examples but it's hardly as
> > revolutionary as they seem to think.
> > Pretty absurd if you ask me;
> > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:34 AM, "René A. Enguehard"
> > <ahugenerd at gmail.com <mailto:ahugenerd at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     I suspect they might be applying for the patent but in for quite a
> >     surprise when it gets rejected. Features for maps would be very
> >     tricky to patent and, more importantly, not in the interest of the
> >     general public. As such the patent applications would probably get
> >     rejected. Would we really want people patenting things like
> >     projections, north arrows, scale bars or legends? I don't think it
> >     would be productive and suspect any patent office in its right
> >     mind would see it the same way.
> >
> >     Patents were created to help people protect their ideas for a
> >     length of time so they could reap the rewards of their work and
> >     refine it without fear of being copied or undercut. This works
> >     very well for many things but fails miserably for conceptual
> >     things like maps or layouts for books or posters. This is why many
> >     patent offices now require people to patent "systems" rather than
> >     "things". I don't see how a wrap-around map could be explained as
> >     a system.
> >
> >     René
> >     IANAL
> >
> >     Landon Blake wrote:
> >
> >
> >         The latest issue of the ACSM Bulletin had an interesting
> >         article about a map matrix that wraps around the edge of a
> >         paper map. It seems the company that is using this feature of
> >         hard copy map design is applying for a patent. I didn't even
> >         think you could get a patent a feature of a paper map. It got
> >         me wondering who holds the patent on the use of a north arrow
> >         and scale.
> >
> >         At any rate, here is the article if you are interested in
> >         reading it:
> >
> >         http://www.webmazine.org/issues/current/documents/wrap.pdf
> >
> >         I couldn't find the patent application, or I would have posted
> >         a link to it. Let me know if you have any comments.
> >
> >         Landon
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20090807/14a4cbdb/attachment-0002.html>