[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch
From: |
Martha H Adams |
Subject: |
Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch |
Date: |
Fri, 14 May 2004 13:16:55 +0000 (UTC) |
More truth up this thread. Yes, a patent can be bad because prior art
got there first. Or because it's so broad it's meaningless. However.
Imagine you're an independent programmer or the owner and operator of
a small business that does $100K or $1 megabuck business per year.
(Side point: most innovation comes from such small people and
businesses.)
Now imagine Microsoft with all its Washington connections not to
mention a $50 billion warchest and a bevy of experienced committed
lawyers sends you a nastygram.
Now you tell me, however right your position might be, does a little
detail like in-the-right make any difference at all who wins?
Assuming anyone can sort it out from the expectable mountain of
verbage?
Cheers -- Martha Adams
Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, Stefaan A Eeckels, 2004/05/13
Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, T . Max Devlin, 2004/05/13
- Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, David, 2004/05/14
- Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch,
Martha H Adams <=
- Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, Cargill, 2004/05/14
- Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, Barry Margolin, 2004/05/14
- Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, Howard Goldstein, 2004/05/14
- Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, Barry Margolin, 2004/05/14
Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, Rahul Dhesi, 2004/05/14
Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, Barry Margolin, 2004/05/14
Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, phil hunt, 2004/05/15
Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, phil hunt, 2004/05/15
Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, AES/newspost, 2004/05/14
Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch, Barry Margolin, 2004/05/14