Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!burl!codas!mtune!bakerst!kathy
From: kathy@bakerst.UUCP
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,comp.misc
Subject: Re: patents
Message-ID: <920@bakerst.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 23-Sep-87 08:07:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: bakerst.920
Posted: Wed Sep 23 08:07:20 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 26-Sep-87 08:40:19 EDT
References: <1372@osiris.UUCP> <441@polyslo.UUCP>
Reply-To: kathy@bakerst.UUCP (Kathy Vincent)
Organization: Independent Spying Ventures Ltd, Winston-Salem, NC
Lines: 25
Keywords: patent
Xref: utgpu sci.crypt:517 comp.misc:1148

In article <17179@glacier.STANFORD.EDU> jbn@glacier.UUCP (John B. Nagle) writes:
>
>    Patents are taken much more seriously today than a few years ago.  One
>reason is the Kodak-Polaroid legislation
>
>    More recently, jurisdiction over patent, trademark, and copyright cases 
>has been centralized ...  The new court is considered pro-patent-holder.
>
>    Being a free-lance inventor, I think that all this is just great.
>
>					John Nagle


Seems to me the trick would be do you as an individual, free-lance
inventor have the money and the time to go up against the battery of
lawyers and words and funds that a corporation intent on "breaking"
(not being a lawyer, I don't claim to be using the correct word here)
your patent would bring to bear if it were really serious?  Polaroid
isn't exactly the guy next door with a lab in his garage and a computer
in his attic and $150 in his savings account ...



Kathy Vincent ------> Home: {ihnp4|mtune|codas|ptsfa}!bakerst!kathy
              ------> AT&T: {ihnp4|mtune|burl}!wrcola!kathy