Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bilow who wrote (58448)	10/22/2000 11:35:53 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi all; A software guy complains about obviousness in software patents: ... THE US PATENT SYSTEM IS TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL There seems to be a general consensus among fellow engineers in my field (and even among the patent attorneys with whom I've spoken) that the US patent system is now totally out of control. It is widely perceived as overly complex, arbitrary and unfair, with its primary beneficiaries being 1) the attorneys who practice in the field and 2) unscrupulous and unproductive businessmen who know how to exploit its weaknesses. Opinions about the patent system range from weary resignation to extreme cynicism and hostility, the latter commonly expressed by engineers who are simply trying to do their jobs. I have yet to find anyone outside the system itself with a positive opinion. (A typical comment: "The only good thing about patents is that they eventually expire.") The patent system purports to encourage innovation and the disclosure of inventions for the general benefit of society. But it has degenerated into a legal free-for-all that seriously threatens the vitality of my industry. The patent system as it currently stands seems to depend almost totally on the good faith of the applicant in disclosing prior art; if the applicant doesn't cite any disqualifying information, the patent is almost automatically granted. Judging from the patents I read, it certainly seems that very little is obvious or trivial to the average patent examiner. Their searches of prior art are generally limited to the patent literature, and even here I've seen some astonishing lapses. FEAR, CYNICISM AND DOUBT NOW SURROUND THE PATENT SYSTEM This is seen most directly in another common attitude, particularly among managers: "Everybody else abuses the patent system, so I have to abuse it too in order to protect myself." They file applications on anything they can get away with. This is not to protect their R&D investments against copying (I've seen patent applications where the total "R&D investment" consists of about 30 minutes of thought) but to have "ammunition" for a counter suit should they be sued for violating another's trivial patent. (I understand this is called "defensive patenting".) But defensive patenting only works when your opponent also produces a product. It is wholly ineffective against those whose sole business is extortion-by-lawsuit, not the creation and manufacture of useful products. ... people.qualcomm.com -- Carl

To: Bilow who wrote (58448)	10/22/2000 12:13:30 PM
From: sylvester80	Respond to of 93625

Bilow, I think the Hitachi prior art claim was based on the HP patent that has already been discussed here and has been found to be irrelevant. With everything that has been thrown on Rambus, Rambus still looks to have the strongest case of them all. Yes, courts will decide, but courts do decide on facts, and the facts are that Rambus already has the patents and nobody has been able to come up with anything to show prior art that invalidates the Rambus patents. If you have any links that technically discuss the patents or any prior art like dramreview.com has done, please post them. Nothing I've seen shows me any proof that the 3 even have a chance into invalidating even one let alone all the patents. IMO, Rambus comes into these cases with a position of huge strength, and the 3 with a position of huge weakness with everything to lose and needing to disprove every single patent count in order to win (not an easy thing to do on its own). So somebody better show me otherwise in technical detail like dramreview.com has done, or Rambus by far is the safest bet to win those cases (enough so that IMO, I'm predicting that the 3 settle before the cases go to a jury - the 3 have way too much to lose if they lose in court. Way too much and a hell of a lot more than settling before a jury trial.) dramreview.com JMHO.