ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Difference between revisions of "Defensive publication and prior art databases"

m (→‎External links: down sides --> Drawbacks)
(minor grammatical correction)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{dud}}
 
{{dud}}
−
One way to invalidate a patent is to find [[prior art]] - an example of the idea that pre-dates the patent. Publishing prior art is a common business strategy. The most known publication to this effect is the <b>IBM Disclosure Bulletin</b><ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Technical_Disclosure_Bulletin</ref>, but other companies like ASEA<ref>http://www.sslug.se/emailarkiv/patentdirektiv/2004_03/msg00001</ref><ref>http://www.sslug.dk/patent/eudirektiv/sv/sslug02-92sv.html</ref> has used it extensively. By publishing ideas you block others from patenting what is already then known.
+
One way to invalidate a patent is to find [[prior art]] - an example of the idea that pre-dates the patent. Publishing prior art is a common business strategy. The most known publication to this effect is the <b>IBM Disclosure Bulletin</b><ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Technical_Disclosure_Bulletin</ref>, but other companies like ASEA<ref>http://www.sslug.se/emailarkiv/patentdirektiv/2004_03/msg00001</ref><ref>http://www.sslug.dk/patent/eudirektiv/sv/sslug02-92sv.html</ref> has used it extensively. By publishing ideas, you block others from patenting what is (now) already known.
  
−
Whether it is better or worse for Free Software to make it easy to find prior art is a subject of much discussion as the question whether published source code may be regarded as prior art<ref>http://lists.keionline.org/pipermail/a2k_lists.keionline.org/2012-October/001576.html</ref>.
+
Whether it is better or worse for Free Software to make it easy to find prior art is a subject of much discussion, as is the question whether published source code may be regarded as prior art<ref>http://lists.keionline.org/pipermail/a2k_lists.keionline.org/2012-October/001576.html</ref>.
  
 
==Limits to effectiveness==
 
==Limits to effectiveness==
Line 13: Line 13:
 
Defensive publication is the idea that by documenting and publishing an idea, you can prevent the future problem that someone else will patent that idea.
 
Defensive publication is the idea that by documenting and publishing an idea, you can prevent the future problem that someone else will patent that idea.
  
−
For example, in 2004, a paper was published on "''Precise detection of memory leaks''".<ref>http://camanis.blogspot.com/2009/08/someone-wants-to-patent-three-year-old.html</ref>  In 2007, a patent application was filed at the [[USPTO]] for a follow-on invention.<ref>http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220080294853%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20080294853&RS=DN/20080294853</ref>  The 2007 application cited the 2004 paper as being part of the state-of-the-art which is extended by the patent application.  The authors of the 2004 paper have no connection to the authors of the 2007 patent application.  Ironically, one of the authors of the 2004 paper is a prominent member of anti-swpat group [[FFII]].
+
For example, in 2004, a paper was published on "''Precise detection of memory leaks''".<ref>http://camanis.blogspot.com/2009/08/someone-wants-to-patent-three-year-old.html</ref>  In 2007, a patent application was filed at the [[USPTO]] for a follow-on invention.<ref>http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220080294853%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20080294853&RS=DN/20080294853</ref>  The 2007 application cited the 2004 paper as being part of the state-of-the-art which is extended by the patent application.  The authors of the 2004 paper have no connection to the authors of the 2007 patent application.  Ironically, one of the authors of the 2004 paper is a prominent member of the anti-software patent group [[FFII]].
  
 
==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}==
 
==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}==

Revision as of 12:26, 16 February 2014

Red alert.png What this entry documents is not a solution.
This practice may be ineffective or useless in the long term.
ESP's position is that abolition of software patents is the only solution.


One way to invalidate a patent is to find prior art - an example of the idea that pre-dates the patent. Publishing prior art is a common business strategy. The most known publication to this effect is the IBM Disclosure Bulletin[1], but other companies like ASEA[2][3] has used it extensively. By publishing ideas, you block others from patenting what is (now) already known.

Whether it is better or worse for Free Software to make it easy to find prior art is a subject of much discussion, as is the question whether published source code may be regarded as prior art[4].

Limits to effectiveness

  1. Sometimes there is no prior art.
  2. Sometimes the prior art only eliminates part of the patent. The patent holder will be permitted to redraft their patent to keep the non duplicated parts while avoiding the prior art you've found.
  3. This can backfire if the database is public because patent applicants could use the database to see what changes are necessary (the smallest changes possible) to avoid being similar to the prior art, so they won't have to worry about their patent being invalidated.

Defensive publication

Defensive publication is the idea that by documenting and publishing an idea, you can prevent the future problem that someone else will patent that idea.

For example, in 2004, a paper was published on "Precise detection of memory leaks".[5] In 2007, a patent application was filed at the USPTO for a follow-on invention.[6] The 2007 application cited the 2004 paper as being part of the state-of-the-art which is extended by the patent application. The authors of the 2004 paper have no connection to the authors of the 2007 patent application. Ironically, one of the authors of the 2004 paper is a prominent member of the anti-software patent group FFII.

Related pages on ESP Wiki

External links

About the Drawbacks

References

  1. ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Technical_Disclosure_Bulletin
  2. ↑ http://www.sslug.se/emailarkiv/patentdirektiv/2004_03/msg00001
  3. ↑ http://www.sslug.dk/patent/eudirektiv/sv/sslug02-92sv.html
  4. ↑ http://lists.keionline.org/pipermail/a2k_lists.keionline.org/2012-October/001576.html
  5. ↑ http://camanis.blogspot.com/2009/08/someone-wants-to-patent-three-year-old.html
  6. ↑ http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220080294853%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20080294853&RS=DN/20080294853
Retrieved from "https://wiki.endsoftwarepatents.org/w/index.php?title=Defensive_publication_and_prior_art_databases&oldid=34942"