RE: [Asrg] US Spam patents: Partial list

On the contrary, prior art can be very useful if the patent is held by the
right party.

Most of the patents are actually in reasonably friendly hands. It is pretty
easy to get a royalty free license if the other party suspects that the
patent is not enforceable and has other more important business interests.

		Phill

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yakov Shafranovich [mailto:research@solidmatrix.com]
> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 12:11 PM
> To: Alan DeKok; asrg@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Asrg] US Spam patents: Partial list 
> 
> 
> At 09:24 AM 6/15/2003 -0400, Alan DeKok wrote:
> 
> >"Peter Kay" <peter@titankey.com> wrote:
> > > I think those type of comments and questions about what 
> is patentable or
> > > not are unproductive to this list,
> >
> >   Discussions of prior art for anti-spam patents should be 
> explicitely
> >on-topic for this list.
> 
> I was originally planning on tracking prior art from the list for the 
> document I am keeping. However, there is simply so much 
> information being 
> provided that I am rethinking the decision. However, I would 
> have to agree 
> with Alan about this: prior art discussions are practically 
> useless for 
> patents that have been already granted, since the group is 
> not planning on 
> using the prior art to challenge the patents. The only useful 
> utility that 
> may possible come from prior art is the determination of how 
> strong the 
> patent is - but then again we are not lawyers.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Asrg mailing list
> Asrg@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
> 
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg