From: Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com>
To: Robert Hettinga <cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 526436947192b8f55780b903fe997fc8f2431517a7ea79d4908f5388200c59d3
Message ID: <3.0.32.19970429233202.0070b8e4@netcom13.netcom.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-04-30 06:40:29 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 23:40:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 23:40:29 -0700 (PDT)
To: Robert Hettinga <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Software patents
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970429233202.0070b8e4@netcom13.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
At 07:30 PM 4/29/97 -0400, Robert Hettinga wrote:
>Anyway, getting back to the point, "avoiding unpleasantness" also means not
>having patent lawyers sue those very essential "hoity-toity" trustee banks
>for rediculous reasons, like patent infringement, actual or not.
There is a simple way to prevent patent lawyers from suing you for supposed
patent infringement. Distribute your software from a jurisdiction in which
software patents do not exist. South Africa is one of many such jurisdictions.
Anecdote: at a conference, I asked a patent attorney what strategy to
follow if your patented technology is only happening in the client
software. He looked at me like I was drooling on myself and said: "Uhm...
Well... Then you have a problem."
IANAL, but I suppose the best strategy for the owners of a shaky software
patent would be to make people believe that their technology is patented in
many more jurisdictions than it actually is.
Have fun,
-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred
"I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and
violence, I would advise violence." Mahatma Gandhi
Return to May 1997
Return to “Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>”