reply to dave

2 Responses to reply to dave

1. Dave Winer says:

   May 19, 2003 at 6:30 am

   Larry, I don’t think that does it.

   You’ve addressed copyright with Creative Commons, but it doesn’t deal with patents. I’m not talking about protecting the expression of an idea, the code, I’m talking about the idea itself.

   I want a registry, a place where I deposit a patent-like document, and trust that the claim will be researched and granted, much like the USPTO does, but with the only benefits to the inventor being credit, and heading off future patent claimers.

   Does this make sense?
2. Bob Wyman says:

   May 19, 2003 at 12:16 pm

   I think you’ll find that the “conservancy” approach isn’t as easily applied to patents as it is to copyrights. I had considered creating such a registry of “open patents” some time ago but then discovered that the result would be the reverse of what was intended.

   The problem is that in many jurisdications, patents are given to those “first to file” not, as in the US to “first to invent.” Thus, you would have people trolling new additions to the registry and filing patent applications even though you could prove that prior art existed. Even in the US, a “junior” inventor can be granted a patent if that junior inventor shows greater diligence in filing a patent application. Of course, the junior inventor would claim to have conceived of the idea sometime before it was published in the registry.

   The basic problem with an “open patent” registry is that it creates a rich source of material for others to use in generating patent applications which encumber the very methods which were intended to be made openly available by inclusion in the registry.

   Unfortunately, the only sure way to prevent someone from patenting something is to patent it yourself.

   bob wyman

Comments are closed.