Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process

["Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <[e-mail]>]

Adam, thought I agree with your meta point about submarine patents existed in the past, I don' think you have this quite right on the details on this one. 

For US patents applications filed prior to June 8, 1995, the term is either 17 years from date of issue or 20 years from earliest priority date, whichever is later. For applications filed after June 8, 1995, the term is 20 years from the earliest priority date.

Given this was filed after 1995, it expires 20 years after the priority date so it expired in 2012. 



On Nov 22, 2013, at 3:54 PM, Adam Roach <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 11/22/13 15:19, Maik Merten wrote:
>> It is hard to come up with a scenario where patents covering the original standard and original reference implementation would still be enforceable. 
> 
> As a specific example of such a scenario -- one that is tantalizingly close to the subject at hand -- look here:
> 
> http://www.google.com/patents/US7376184
> 
> Read the first paragraph of the description. In layman's terms, it says "even though this patent is being issued in 2008, we claim that it was invented in January of 1992." And with a priority date prior to 1995, this means that they have protection for seventeen years from the date of issuance (i.e., until 2025).
> 
> Yes, this means that they have patent protection on this specific technique for 33 years after its invention.
> 
> In US courts, this is 100% legal and fully enforceable, since they started the process prior to 1995. And "prior to 1995" is exactly when we're talking about.
> 
> /a
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb