Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.org.eff.talk:9469 misc.int-property:589 comp.unix.bsd:6480 Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!sgiblab!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!panix!oppedahl From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,alt.suit.att-bsdi,comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: Patents: What they are. What they aren't. Other factors. Message-ID: <1992Oct12.185642.12043@panix.com> Date: 12 Oct 92 18:56:42 GMT References: <id.4EWT.75D@ferranti.com> <1992Oct9.002901.14966@netcom.com> <22808.Oct1104.20.0092@virtualnews.nyu.edu> <1992Oct11.051428.9194@netcom.com> Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Lines: 23 In <1992Oct11.051428.9194@netcom.com> mcgregor@netcom.com (Scott Mcgregor) writes: >In article <22808.Oct1104.20.0092@virtualnews.nyu.edu> brnstnd@nyu.edu (D. J. Bernstein) writes: >>In article <1992Oct9.002901.14966@netcom.com> mcgregor@netcom.com (Scott Mcgregor) writes: >>Okay, Scott, where is Paperback Software? >Gone I am afraid. But where are all the firms that couldn't get >started that couldn't get funding? Might there be more of the latter >than the former? May I point out that the Paperback Software case was a copyright case, not a patent case? Nothing that happened in PS has any bearing on whether or not patents should be granted on systems containing a lot of software. And PS was only a district-court case. It was never appealed. We will never know what would have happened if it had been appealed. Carl Oppedahl AA2KW (intellectual property lawyer) 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, NY 10112-0228 voice 212-408-2578 fax 212-765-2519