Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.org.eff.talk:9517 misc.int-property:602 comp.unix.bsd:6736 Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!virtualnews.nyu.edu!brnstnd From: brnstnd@nyu.edu (D. J. Bernstein) 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: <20357.Oct1800.30.1492@virtualnews.nyu.edu> Date: 18 Oct 92 00:30:14 GMT References: <1992Oct9.002901.14966@netcom.com> <22808.Oct1104.20.0092@virtualnews.nyu.edu> <1992Oct11.051428.9194@netcom.com> Organization: IR Lines: 36 In article <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: > >> I don't believe that you can be held to infringe LZW if you > >> use it to encrypt data > >Claim 1 of the Unisys LZW patent covers any system which engages in a > >certain process. That process is LZW. If you somehow use LZW for a > >different purpose, you will still infringe upon that patent. > No, it says "in a data compression...system". If you are in a process > for making rubber, or image enhancement you are not in a "data > compression...system" and you don't infringe. False. If, within such a process, you use the LZW algorithm, then you are achieving the same result as the process covered by the patent (in the same way), so you infringe. > >Ah. You have enough time in a week to write thousands of lines of > >pro-software-patent rhetoric in a public forum, and you don't have > >enough time to come up with a single example of a beneficial software > >patent to contrast to dozens of examples of hurtful software patents. > No, I don't have MORE time to spend on this because it isn't getting > anywhere. As you point out I have spent considerable time so far. I've > given considerable examples but you just don't happen to agree with > them. I guess I missed the examples. Come on, Scott. Give patent numbers. Give names. If somebody other than a patent holder has been helped by software patents, *name him*. > Dan has > claimed What I have ``claimed,'' Scott, can be quoted directly. I very much dislike your highly inaccurate paraphrases. ---Dan