but is a published process like the xml standard patentable?
"Grant Robertson" <bogus@b...> wrote in message
news:MPG.207cba3f38602069989718@n......
> In article <r7e9e4-c7v.ln1@g...>,
> simon@j... says...
> > I think you are deluding yourself. In most of the world, software
patents
> > are illegal anyway (as they should be). In the US, where they're not
> > illegal, as you yourself say the people likely to 'embrace and extend' a
> > successful standard are Microsoft. Do you think you could afford a
battle
> > with Microsoft in the US courts? How many billion dollars could you
> > personally afford to pay your lawyers?
> >
>
> Technically, this wouldn't be a software patent. It would be a process
> patent. If patents on standards were worthless, do you think Sun would
> have patented Open Document Format? Perhaps. Big companies patent how
> many steps it took to get down the hall today, just in case.
>
> I wouldn't battle Microsoft in the courts. I would battle them in the
> public press. I would shame Bill Gates for trying to monopolize education
> and profit from the suffering of the poor. I would also write his wife a
> letter asking her to appeal to what little conscience he has left.
>
> Besides, are you saying that I should never try to protect intellectual
> property just because someone like Bill Gates could steal it if they
> wanted to? If that were the case then we might as well just stop
> inventing anything and let Microsoft and IBM do it all.
>
> If I don't protect the standard then I will have more than Microsoft to
> deal with. I will then have to deal with every shyster with a lawyer
> trying to horn in on my invention.
>
> I want to give it away for free. But, in order to do that, I have to
> ensure that it will stay free.