IFI Critique

[BrianBSL]

Originally Posted by Joe Johnson

I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV but I do have 18 patents and quite a bit of experience with patent related issues. I am sure that it is possible to design a system that does not voilate this patent.

Furthermore, a patent is nothing more than a license to sue someone for violating the patent. Once in court, the presumption is that the patent is valid, but the court may decide to invalidate the patent for many reasons including existing prior art that may not have been considered by the patent examiner.

America is a "first to invent" country (as opposed to most of the rest of the world which "first to file"). The upshot of this is that if a competition that can document that they were using such a system to run their competitions prior to the priority date on the patent application (October 5, 2001), the patent would be declared invalid.

Bottom line: Despite its 58 claims, I do not view this patent as a particularly strong.

Joe J.

I wasn't arguing anything about working around their patent etc - just saying it was logical that since they own the patent they own the designs on their current products (not FIRST).

I don't think too highly of the current patent system...espically companies like NTP and even Apple who abuse it.