SV: Re: [sdiy] Flash Drive with Floppy Interface?

[dj hohum]

Patents that can't be defended are in essence, not valid. The patent
only provides you with some part of the legal defense. They are
immaterial without the courts. If you don't have the means to defend a
patent then you only have one part of the required protection against
violation.

Everyone who applies for patents, knows, or should know this. The
patent does not give you any sort of automatic protection against
others implementing the idea. It is not necessary to challenge a
patent in court if the other party is unprepared to defend it.

Granted there are attorneys who will work on contingency, but the
point is that if the the holder can't defend their patent it isn't the
responsibility of others to do it for them.

That IS the American system.

On 6/4/07, Scott Gravenhorst <music.maker at gte.net> wrote:
> "dj hohum" <djhohum at gmail.com> wrote:
> >Because that is the American system. Save your judgement. It is
> >perfectly legitimate to challenge patents and the concept of patents.
> >I'm no attorney but the patent seems somewhat specific to me and it's
> >possible that it can be worked around.
> >
>
> If one has documentation of prior work with respect to a patent, then the
> court case is an
> obvious thing to do and it makes perfect sense to do so.
>
> My question still remains, why does it matter if the patent holder is
> financially able to
> defend it?
>
>
> >
> >On 6/4/07, Scott Gravenhorst <music.maker at gte.net> wrote:
> >> karl dalen <dalenkarl at yahoo.se> wrote:
> >> >karl dalen <dalenkarl at yahoo.se> wrote:
> >> >>Well, building one for yourself don't need any license!
> >> >
> >> >>Here, I agree.
> >>
> >> >>And does the patent holder has economic means to defend any intrusions?
> >>
> >> Karl, tell us why this would matter.
> >>
> >> >>Here, I disagree.
> >> >>That's a telling ethical statement.
> >> >>So we should only obey patent and copyright law if the
> >> >>owner can take us to court?
> >> >
> >> >I dint say you should, it was just an reply, a question to what previous
> >> >poster said about circumventing the patent, dont asume your ethical
> ideas
> >> >to something that was never said in the first place.
> >>
> >> I never said you said one should - if you look, I was asking you a
> question.
> >>  Please
> >> explain how I should take the remark made by you.  That is, why would a
> >> patent holder's
> >> financial ability to defend against a violation of it make a single shred
> of
> >> difference?
> >> If that patent is valid, then the patent should be obeyed - period -
> >> regardless of whether
> >> the holder is rich or poor.  Your statement was, at least, not very well
> >> thought out.
> >>
> >> And don't you dare preach to me about MY ethical ideas.  It was YOUR
> >> statement, not mine.
> >>  If anyone needs to explain exactly what they mean, sir, it is you.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -- ScottG
> >>
> >> -------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> -- Scott Gravenhorst
> >> -- GateMan I - Xilinx Spartan-3E Based MIDI Synthesizer
> >> -- FatMan: home1.gte.net/res0658s/fatman/
> >> -- NonFatMan: home1.gte.net/res0658s/electronics/
> >> -- When the going gets tough, the tough use the command line.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Synth-diy mailing list
> >> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> >> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> >>
> >
>
> -- ScottG
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -- Scott Gravenhorst
> -- GateMan I - Xilinx Spartan-3E Based MIDI Synthesizer
> -- FatMan: home1.gte.net/res0658s/fatman/
> -- NonFatMan: home1.gte.net/res0658s/electronics/
> -- When the going gets tough, the tough use the command line.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>