Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • The major problem with the UKPO and EPO allowing through dodgy patents, is that it isn't one or two it is tens of thousands.

    Baring in mind it is a lot harder for the same piece of code to be prior art than infringing, and the legal costs involved these timebombs just accumulate silently and unchallenged.

    Worse still the patent offices refuse to clean up their own mess and expect other people to go to court to do what the patent office should have done in the first place.
    --

    @JAPH = qw(Hacker Perl Another Just);
    print reverse @JAPH;
  • HOWTO: invalidate a patent application with prior art [taint.org]

    However, once the cat is in the bag, so to speak, ie. once the patent has been granted, it takes about $1,000,000 (yes, you read correctly) to invalidate it in court. Now imagine Sun Microsystems (or IBM, or Microsoft, or Apple, or Google, or…) has hundreds of bogus, invalidable patents like this one. You are a small company and BigCorpOfChoice wants to bring you down. They file a suit for infringement on 10 of their bogus patents. You could inv

  • I know this is coming a little late, but I finally spoke to a patent attorney about this and he concluded that it's very specific to a very particular testing process having to do with test prioritization. It was rejected by the examiners and rewritten several times.

    Also it looks like it's a purely defensive patent on the part of Sun and they have a clean track record.

    So nothing to worry about.