Re: ripped off by the evil empire

[Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com>]

Around 08:25 PM 7/8/1999 -0400, rumor has it that Geoffrey Dutton said:
>OK, now you're up to speed. IF you are still reading, I would like to hear
>some opinions on what MS did and what I might do. Specifically,

Sorry to hear your plight. Its actually not all that uncommon. And its
getting worse.  I'm not an attorney, but I am President of the League for
Programming Freedom, which has been working to change the patent laws.
Unfortunately, the laws have been changed for the worse and are on schedule
to be changed more for the worse.  Soon, the patent system will be
first-to-file instead of first-to-invent, and then what happened to you
will be fair game, and perfectly legal.

>1. How is it possible to obtain a patent for something that has been publicly
>   disclosed (by either oneself or others) in the literature? (I can cite at
>   least 6 papers beside mine that describe something like or derived from
QTM)

Its "possible" because the PTO does not do adequate research on the novelty
of patent applications.  That makes it possible to get such "bad patents"
issued.  After you publish, you have one year to file a patent application.
 After that, the knowledge is in the public domain, and cannot be patented.
More importantly, it can be used to invalidate a patent.  At least under
present law.

>2. Can one patent a quadtree (or other data structure) as such, or only in
>   the context of a device that serves some useful purpose? (I noticed other
>   patents where "quadtree" occurs but did not read them yet).

Err, thats usually the way patents are written.

>3. If I market software based on QTM, might I be forced to pay royalties to
>   Microsoft? (I have such code but no present plans to market it)

Probably not. But you probably have to sue (and win) to invalidate their
patent. That could still be expensive, and you have to put up the money
until you win. 

Ignoring them (even if they ignore you) isn't a good thing for you. They
can still bully your potential customers into choosing their product over
yours.  

More than just royalties are at stake.

>4. If I put a demo of QTM on my website, might I be in violation of the
>   Encarta Atlas patent? (which specifically covers a CD-ROM product)

Same as #3. Patent covers any "use".

>5. What might it take to invalidate a given patent, or portions of it?
>   (in this case there is only one claim that seems to apply, and it only
>   refers to "identifying said memory blocks in hybrid-quad-tree format",
>   but there is more detail later on, where drawings are discussed)

A good patent attorney, and sufficient money.   MS will undoubtedly try to
assert that the patent doesn't cover your invention, <except that you can't
make a product that doesn't infringe>.  This really isn't something you
should try to do yourself. If you lose, you might be prevented from using
your own work.

>6. Is it possible to revise a current patent to include additional inventors?
>   (i.e, if I can't beat 'em, join 'em and ask for royalties?)

I don't think so. A patent can be revised for claims, but I don't think you
can add inventors.  You could presumably negotiate a deal with MS in anycase.

>7. Is there any point in trying to bring this to the attention of the US DOJ,
>   or is the MS suit too far along?

This isn't relevant to the anti-trust suit, I don't think.

		--Dean



++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
           Plain Aviation, Inc                  dean@av8.com
           LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP          http://www.av8.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++