decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Say goodbye to standards... | 210 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Say goodbye to standards...
Authored by: 400guy on Saturday, July 07 2012 @ 12:54 PM EDT

Anon asked …

why would any company offer it's patents to a standards body?

One obvious possible answer:  the company expects to profit more by competing in a large market than by keeping its monopoly in a small one.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

In that case, why would any company offer it's patents to a standards body
Authored by: ThrPilgrim on Saturday, July 07 2012 @ 03:32 PM EDT
I'd hope that the companies marketing department was smarter than that.

'Look our patent is so good it's in standard A, now why don't you licence it
from us for product B'

---
Beware of him who would deny you access to information for in his heart he
considers himself your master.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Say goodbye to standards...
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 07 2012 @ 09:11 PM EDT
The simple fact is that a lot of standards, especially in the hardware world,
depend on complex technology that is legitimately patented.

This cannot possibly be true.

When you are producing a standard, the whole point of the exercise is that
ANYONE skilled in the art can produce a conforming product. There is NO need,
none whatsoever, for ANYONE to consult ANY information contained in ANY possible
patent.

(What would I know? I produced my company's official review response to one
proposed ANSI standard; and shepherded several company products through official
tests designed to test conformity. (In all cases, with no deviations found.)

At no time did I ever stop and think, "how did they expect us to do
THAT?" It was always "OK, so they want THAT--not what we were doing,
but it'll be easy enough to change things to do it their way."

Any standard that doesn't elicit that response can't function as a standard. And
everyone that works on a standard knows that.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Nope! Say hi to genuine open standards that are not Corporate ruled.
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 08 2012 @ 03:32 PM EDT
There is nothing to stop entities from developing patented items that meet
standards requirements. It would just stop them blocking competition and
development of better products by others. A standard should never be subject to
patent fees.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )