Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!proto!joe From: joe@proto.COM (Joe Huffman) Newsgroups: comp.graphics Subject: Re: Pixar's patent on stochastic image generation Summary: See 35 U.S.C. 102(g) Message-ID: <1462@proto.COM> Date: 31 Oct 90 20:30:56 GMT References: <67527@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> Organization: Prototronics; Sandpoint, Idaho Lines: 73 In article , trn@warper.jhuapl.edu (Tony Nardo) writes: > joe@proto.COM (Joe Huffman) writes: > > >A patent allow the holder to halt distribution of any type, free or otherwise. > >A patent is a legal monopoly. You can literal say that no one (within the > >domain of your patent) may possess, use, or sell the patented item. Even if > >the non-patent holder developed it first or independantly. [...] > ^^^^^ > That turns out not to be the case. If the non-patent holder can prove he > invented the item first, that invalidates the current patent. According to Title 35, United States Code, section 102 this is not quite true... I quote: 102. Conditions for patentability; novelty and loss of right to patent. A person shall be entitled to a patent unless-- (a) the invention was known to be used by other in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent, or . . . (g) before the applicant's invention thereof the invention was made in this country by another who had not abandoned, suppressed, or concealed it. In determining priority of invention there shall be considered not only the respective dates of conception and reduction to practice of the invention, but also the reasonable diligence of one who was first to conceive and last to reduce to practice, from a time prior to conception by the other. End quote. This was as of July 1979. Things may have changed of course. But other references I have seen to indicate this was still true as of 1984. The way this was explained to me by a patent attorney was that if you don't make your invention available for "the good of the public" (via selling your product, or patenting it) then someone else can patent it as long as they did their work independant from you. Once they have the patent "... whoever without authority makes, uses, or sells any patented invention, within the United States during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent." See 35 U.S.C. 271 (a). You must reduce your invention to practice and make a public sale of it one year before they file the application to be assured of invalidating the other guys patent. If less than one year then it can go either way. > A patent may > only be held by the *first* inventor, not the fastest to the patent office. No so in Europe. First to patent office wins. I am not an attorney. If it's really important to you talk to someone that knows the current law and can interpret it as it applies to your circumstances. For further reference see also Professional Program Session Record 2 -- "Protecting and Exploiting Software Developments", Northcon/84, October 2-4, 1984, Seattle, WA. > The problem with patents is that you have to defend them against *every* > infringement or you could lose them. Unless you have very deep pockets, this > may be too burdensome for an individual -- whether you're talking hardware > *or* software. Agreed. Part of the reason why I write software these days instead of design hardware. Maybe I should go (way) back to farming... -- joe@proto.com FAX: 208-263-8772