<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Actually the patent office looks for prior art to form the foundation for
a new patent.. The example noted on Slashdot is Exactly what the
patent office and patent attorneys looks for... Google providing translation
of webpages, etc. before transmission to client. MS looks to
build on that to do translation of IM text before transmission. The
prior art here is foundational for MS' patent. It doesn't matter
if the idea has merit or isn't very practical (as in translations using
Babel Fish aren't exactly A+ work).
<p>But if the item being patented isn't substantially different or an improvement
in some aspect of the prior art then it is not a valid patent.
The real point is you need lots of dollars to contend against them.
<p>Another point is that you can in turn make substantial improvements
on processes that they patent, which are patentable in their own right.
You might also create entirely different mechanisms to do the same thing
and so not infringe on their patent..
<p>Software patents may suck, but they also are reality. You have
to defend yourselves by either creating your own patent portfolio (and
patents are really only worth something if the right patent attorneys did
the work) and also must defend that portfolio (by being litigious)...
<p>Alternately, you may publicly document all ideas to prevent new patents
from being accepted. And the documentation of those ideas must
be in forums that the patent office will notice in evaluating claims...
Otherwise, it will require litigation to expose your work as prior art.
(Meaning, i don't think the patent office will search JDEV or other online
forums to test claims prior to making its decisions.)
<p>Frank
<br>
<p>Bart van Bragt wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>Don't patents become void when there has been prior
art? I saw some
<br>people that mentioned prior art on slashdot?
<p>Richard Dobson wrote:
<br>> Microsoft Patenting IM Translation?
<br>> <a href="http://slashdot.org/articles/03/07/03/1759201.shtml?tid=155&tid=99">http://slashdot.org/articles/03/07/03/1759201.shtml?tid=155&tid=99</a>
<br>>
<br>> Looks like we might not be able to do this now.
<p>This proves (again) that software patents just plain suck :\
<p>Bart
<p>_______________________________________________
<br>jdev mailing list
<br>jdev@jabber.org
<br><a href="http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev">http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev</a></blockquote>
</html>