ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!
Long pages
Showing below up to 250 results in range #1 to #250.
View (previous 250 | next 250) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)
- (hist) 201001 acta.pdf as text [191,225 bytes]
- (hist) ACTA-6437-10.pdf as text [89,892 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/日本語 (Japanese) [69,306 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Ελληνικά (Greek) [66,313 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Русский (Russian) [56,899 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Persian [54,299 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Français (French) [47,433 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/English [44,458 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/עברית (Hebrew) [40,708 bytes]
- (hist) Oracle v. Google (2010, USA) [39,673 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Українська (Ukrainian) [38,244 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Italiano (Italian) [37,263 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Español-Bolivia (Spanish) [35,010 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Română (Romanian) [34,980 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/한국어 (Korean) [34,869 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Español (Spanish) [32,926 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/简体中文 (Simplified Chinese) [32,158 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Polski (Polish) [31,920 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Suomi (Finnish) [31,798 bytes]
- (hist) Harmonization of European patent systems [28,690 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Svenska (Swedish) [27,187 bytes]
- (hist) Who should see Patent Absurdity in 2010 [25,075 bytes]
- (hist) Alice v. CLS Bank ruling by US Supreme Court on 19 June 2014 [24,523 bytes]
- (hist) Briefs submitted to EPO EBoA G3-08 [23,547 bytes]
- (hist) Shielding software from litigation [21,190 bytes]
- (hist) Why abolish software patents [21,034 bytes]
- (hist) Bilski brainstorming [20,504 bytes]
- (hist) Australian consultation responses 2009 [19,224 bytes]
- (hist) Australia [18,130 bytes]
- (hist) Links to be processed [16,745 bytes]
- (hist) Workspace: A house that computes (analogy) [16,510 bytes]
- (hist) I4i v. Microsoft (2009, USA) [15,415 bytes]
- (hist) Microsoft [14,761 bytes]
- (hist) Patents Act 2013 [14,748 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Cooperation Treaty [13,930 bytes]
- (hist) Another Parable of the Cave: progress in knowledge untethered to scarcities is promoted through increased access [13,591 bytes]
- (hist) Patent troll [13,202 bytes]
- (hist) Why software is different [13,061 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Português do Brasil (Brazilian Portuguese) [12,753 bytes]
- (hist) Bilski ruling by US Supreme Court on 28 June 2010 [12,436 bytes]
- (hist) Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement overview [12,413 bytes]
- (hist) Patent clauses in software licenses [12,016 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Dansk (Danish) [11,485 bytes]
- (hist) Asymmetric numeral systems [11,281 bytes]
- (hist) Choosing words to use in legal proposals [11,183 bytes]
- (hist) Bilski v. Kappos amicus briefs [10,982 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity/Deutsch (German) [10,892 bytes]
- (hist) Alice v. CLS Bank (2012, USA) [10,633 bytes]
- (hist) Letter to the European Commission's proposal for a Regulation on standard-essential patents [10,309 bytes]
- (hist) Open Invention Network [10,281 bytes]
- (hist) Martin Goetz [10,234 bytes]
- (hist) Case law in Germany [10,103 bytes]
- (hist) Case law in the UK [9,889 bytes]
- (hist) Google [9,820 bytes]
- (hist) MPEG LA [9,614 bytes]
- (hist) TRIPS Agreement [9,586 bytes]
- (hist) Free software projects harmed by software patents [9,367 bytes]
- (hist) Unified Patent Court [9,290 bytes]
- (hist) Reducing patent duration [9,233 bytes]
- (hist) IBM and MS deciding New Zealand legislation [9,175 bytes]
- (hist) Symbian ruling by UK Court of Appeal on 8 October 2008 [9,172 bytes]
- (hist) Freedom of expression [8,948 bytes]
- (hist) Analogies [8,776 bytes]
- (hist) How to read patents [8,665 bytes]
- (hist) European Patent Convention [8,608 bytes]
- (hist) In re Bilski ruling by US CAFC on 30 October 2008 [8,423 bytes]
- (hist) Free software [8,231 bytes]
- (hist) Legislation in the USA [8,142 bytes]
- (hist) European Patent Office [8,077 bytes]
- (hist) Bilski's patent application text [8,074 bytes]
- (hist) Example software patents [8,067 bytes]
- (hist) Harm caused by all types of patents [8,007 bytes]
- (hist) United Patent Litigation System [7,985 bytes]
- (hist) Mayo ruling by US Supreme Court on 20 March 2012 [7,919 bytes]
- (hist) MPL and patents [7,893 bytes]
- (hist) Amazon ruling by Canadian Federal Court on 14 October 2010 [7,857 bytes]
- (hist) Supreme Court of the United States [7,831 bytes]
- (hist) CSIRO wifi patent [7,758 bytes]
- (hist) ESP's brief for EPO referral G3-08 [7,752 bytes]
- (hist) EPO case law [7,747 bytes]
- (hist) Electronic Frontier Foundation [7,746 bytes]
- (hist) Drafting the next US amicus brief [7,712 bytes]
- (hist) Main Page [7,690 bytes]
- (hist) Gowers Review of Intellectual Property [7,587 bytes]
- (hist) In re Alappat ruling by US CAFC on 29 July 1994 [7,427 bytes]
- (hist) Apple Inc. [7,353 bytes]
- (hist) Israel [7,297 bytes]
- (hist) India [7,296 bytes]
- (hist) Implicit patent licence [7,201 bytes]
- (hist) Java and patents [7,149 bytes]
- (hist) Eurasian Patent Convention [6,999 bytes]
- (hist) Raising examination standards [6,898 bytes]
- (hist) Amazon's one-click shopping patent [6,864 bytes]
- (hist) .NET, C-sharp, and Mono [6,863 bytes]
- (hist) WebM, VP8 and VP9 [6,732 bytes]
- (hist) NetApp's filesystem patents [6,719 bytes]
- (hist) Red Hat [6,697 bytes]
- (hist) Microsoft v. ATT ruling by US Supreme Court on 30 April 2007 [6,622 bytes]
- (hist) Richard Posner on software patents [6,583 bytes]
- (hist) Studies on economics and innovation [6,458 bytes]
- (hist) The value of promises and estoppel defences [6,420 bytes]
- (hist) Software does not make a computer a new machine [6,399 bytes]
- (hist) Timothy B. Lee on software patents [6,370 bytes]
- (hist) EPO EBoA referral G3-08 [6,368 bytes]
- (hist) Settled expectations [6,337 bytes]
- (hist) Infringement is unavoidable and clearance is impossible [6,327 bytes]
- (hist) Aerotel ruling by UK Court of Appeal on 27 October 2006 [6,316 bytes]
- (hist) United States Patent and Trademark Office [6,296 bytes]
- (hist) Bilski v. Kappos (2010, USA) [6,134 bytes]
- (hist) Software is math [6,105 bytes]
- (hist) United States International Trade Commission [6,059 bytes]
- (hist) Motorola v. Apple (2010, USA) [5,997 bytes]
- (hist) Software patents exist in Europe, kinda [5,981 bytes]
- (hist) U.S. Ethernet Innovations v. many (2009, USA) [5,948 bytes]
- (hist) News 2010 [5,937 bytes]
- (hist) ESP report February 2011 [5,930 bytes]
- (hist) Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement [5,880 bytes]
- (hist) Forum shopping [5,822 bytes]
- (hist) Examples of use for sabotage [5,810 bytes]
- (hist) US government [5,776 bytes]
- (hist) Category tree [5,698 bytes]
- (hist) Microsoft royalty demands for Android and other non-Microsoft software [5,690 bytes]
- (hist) United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit [5,614 bytes]
- (hist) Open letter on Australian software patents [5,600 bytes]
- (hist) CPTN Holdings LLC [5,582 bytes]
- (hist) Harm to standards and compatibility [5,412 bytes]
- (hist) IBM v. TurboHercules in 2010 [5,411 bytes]
- (hist) In re Spansion by US Third Circuit on 21 December 2012 [5,403 bytes]
- (hist) Cost of getting patents and maintaining them [5,330 bytes]
- (hist) USA patent courts and appeals [5,307 bytes]
- (hist) United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office [5,276 bytes]
- (hist) FRAND [5,232 bytes]
- (hist) Germany [5,219 bytes]
- (hist) Audio-video patents [5,191 bytes]
- (hist) State Street ruling by US CAFC on 23 July 1998 [5,181 bytes]
- (hist) EPO G3-08 brainstorming [5,167 bytes]
- (hist) Africa [5,160 bytes]
- (hist) France [5,144 bytes]
- (hist) Apple v. HTC (2010, USA) [5,095 bytes]
- (hist) Novell [5,063 bytes]
- (hist) Japan [5,061 bytes]
- (hist) Phone patent litigation [5,054 bytes]
- (hist) Intellectual Ventures [5,053 bytes]
- (hist) Criteria for patentability [5,025 bytes]
- (hist) Microsoft FAT patents [5,015 bytes]
- (hist) John Paul Stevens (US Supreme Court Justice) on software patents [4,987 bytes]
- (hist) Suggestions for the USPTO in 2013 [4,973 bytes]
- (hist) ACTA and software patents [4,930 bytes]
- (hist) SAS ruling by EU Court of Justice on 2 May 2012 [4,916 bytes]
- (hist) EU software patents directive [4,911 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Quality and Settlement Among Repeat Patent Litigants [4,892 bytes]
- (hist) Specialised patent court [4,891 bytes]
- (hist) German patent courts and appeals [4,884 bytes]
- (hist) Patent non-aggression pacts [4,862 bytes]
- (hist) Invalidating harmful patents [4,855 bytes]
- (hist) Ireland [4,839 bytes]
- (hist) European Commission answer to P-010463-12 [4,823 bytes]
- (hist) Blocking innovation and research [4,817 bytes]
- (hist) Harvard 2019 study on government technology policy effects [4,777 bytes]
- (hist) Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure [4,759 bytes]
- (hist) 2008 Berkeley Patent Survey [4,757 bytes]
- (hist) Canada [4,734 bytes]
- (hist) Statements from venture capitalists [4,714 bytes]
- (hist) IBM [4,689 bytes]
- (hist) Comparing Java to .Net and C-sharp [4,681 bytes]
- (hist) Patentability in the USA after Bilski [4,663 bytes]
- (hist) Case law in Australia [4,662 bytes]
- (hist) Rockstar Consortium and the Nortel patents [4,661 bytes]
- (hist) USPTO 2010 consultation [4,651 bytes]
- (hist) Let's avoid the term "Intellectual property" [4,611 bytes]
- (hist) Searching for patents [4,610 bytes]
- (hist) SAP [4,558 bytes]
- (hist) Cost of the patent system to governments [4,545 bytes]
- (hist) Andean Community [4,539 bytes]
- (hist) Alice v. CLS Bank amicus briefs [4,530 bytes]
- (hist) Patent Absurdity [4,414 bytes]
- (hist) Oracle v. SAP (2010, USA) [4,404 bytes]
- (hist) Changes in company policy over time [4,367 bytes]
- (hist) Case law in the USA [4,322 bytes]
- (hist) As such [4,320 bytes]
- (hist) OpenGL [4,262 bytes]
- (hist) Blackboard inc. [4,252 bytes]
- (hist) Software patents [4,249 bytes]
- (hist) United Kingdom [4,228 bytes]
- (hist) GNU General Public License Version 2 [4,226 bytes]
- (hist) Unitary patent [4,215 bytes]
- (hist) Oracle [4,175 bytes]
- (hist) Countries and regions [4,162 bytes]
- (hist) New Zealand [4,144 bytes]
- (hist) Disclosure is unreadable [4,107 bytes]
- (hist) Diamond v. Diehr ruling by US Supreme Court on 3 March 1981 [4,099 bytes]
- (hist) Please help find these documents [4,095 bytes]
- (hist) South Africa [4,084 bytes]
- (hist) Use software and functionality from 20 years ago [4,039 bytes]
- (hist) Defensive publication and prior art databases [4,031 bytes]
- (hist) Interval Licensing v. 11 big companies (2010, USA) [4,004 bytes]
- (hist) Timeline [4,003 bytes]
- (hist) Blanket patent licences and promises [3,986 bytes]
- (hist) Belgium [3,978 bytes]
- (hist) Software patents harm SMEs [3,941 bytes]
- (hist) Costly legal costs [3,930 bytes]
- (hist) Saving High-Tech Innovators from Egregious Legal Disputes Act [3,893 bytes]
- (hist) HTML5 and video patents [3,887 bytes]
- (hist) Mp3 [3,822 bytes]
- (hist) List of lawsuits [3,820 bytes]
- (hist) Machine translation of patents [3,796 bytes]
- (hist) Workspace for Canada 1-click appeal [3,745 bytes]
- (hist) Patent review by the public [3,743 bytes]
- (hist) UK patent courts and appeals [3,742 bytes]
- (hist) Free software exception [3,695 bytes]
- (hist) Terminology recommendations [3,694 bytes]
- (hist) Acacia v. Red Hat and Novell (2010, USA) [3,653 bytes]
- (hist) America Invents Act [3,642 bytes]
- (hist) Gulf Cooperation Council [3,627 bytes]
- (hist) Pen and paper patents [3,606 bytes]
- (hist) Webpages that disappeared [3,602 bytes]
- (hist) Fake representatives of free software [3,599 bytes]
- (hist) Microsoft FAT ruling by German BGH on 20 April 2010 [3,578 bytes]
- (hist) Bangui Agreement [3,529 bytes]
- (hist) Storyline and fashion patents [3,508 bytes]
- (hist) Trend Micro v. Barracuda, Fortinet (2008, USA) [3,506 bytes]
- (hist) End Software Patents [3,504 bytes]
- (hist) More than patent trolls [3,478 bytes]
- (hist) Uruguay [3,460 bytes]
- (hist) Gottschalk v. Benson ruling by US Supreme Court on 20 November 1972 [3,443 bytes]
- (hist) Calculating damages and legal fees in the USA [3,439 bytes]
- (hist) Bill Gates on software patents [3,417 bytes]
- (hist) Inequality between small and large patent holders [3,414 bytes]
- (hist) Current events [3,401 bytes]
- (hist) Controllable forces of nature [3,374 bytes]
- (hist) I4i v. Microsoft ruling by the US Supreme Court on 9 June 2011 [3,362 bytes]
- (hist) Consulta brasileira do escritório de patentes 2012 [3,358 bytes]
- (hist) Ogg Theora [3,347 bytes]
- (hist) Brazil [3,331 bytes]
- (hist) NZICT [3,300 bytes]
- (hist) Some SMEs like software patents myth [3,284 bytes]
- (hist) Particular machine or transformation [3,253 bytes]
- (hist) European Patent Office grants software patents [3,245 bytes]
- (hist) Antitrust law [3,242 bytes]
- (hist) Brasil [3,239 bytes]
- (hist) Minor reform proposals in the USA [3,215 bytes]
- (hist) 2008 State of Software Patents [3,208 bytes]
- (hist) Patent standards here are higher than in the USA [3,204 bytes]
- (hist) Invalid patents remain unchallenged [3,190 bytes]
- (hist) Silly patents [3,185 bytes]
- (hist) Publishing information is made dangerous [3,160 bytes]
- (hist) German parliament petition against software patents [3,156 bytes]
- (hist) List of recordings and transcripts [3,153 bytes]
- (hist) More than innovation [3,149 bytes]
- (hist) Microsoft Community Promise, and the OSP [3,142 bytes]