ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Harm to standards and compatibility

Revision as of 09:53, 25 September 2012 by Ciaran (talk | contribs) (Related pages on {{SITENAME}}: ==Possible defence against non-disclosed patents== From Wikipedia: <blockquote> In 2005, Qualcomm, which was the assignee of US5,452,104 and US5,576,767, sued Bro)

Patents harm standards and compatibility by blocking the inclusion of necessary or important functionality.

Standards and compatibility are essential for software - more so than other fields. If a word processor or a video player cannot read popular document or video formats, it is simply not a functional word processor or video player. Reading other formats and protocols, regardless of how innovative, will not suffice to fulfil the role of being a document reader or video player.

Standards with patent problems

Possible defence against non-disclosed patents

From Wikipedia:

In 2005, Qualcomm, which was the assignee of US5,452,104 and US5,576,767, sued Broadcom in US District Court, alleging that Broadcom infringed the two patents by making products that were compliant with the H.264 video compression standard.[3] In 2007, the District Court found that the patents were unenforceable because Qualcomm had failed to disclose them to the JVT prior to the release of the H.264 standard in May 2003.[3] In December 2008, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court's order that the patents be unenforceable but remanded to the District Court with instructions to limit the scope of unenforceability to H.264 compliant products.[3]

Can you help? Need to rewrite the paragraph from Wikipedia to fit ESP Wiki.


Related pages on ESP Wiki

External links

General articles

Specific standards harmed

References