Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!labrea!glacier!jbn
From: jbn@glacier.STANFORD.EDU (John B. Nagle)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: Back to Intellectual Property (was: Re: Free Free Flow)
Message-ID: <17559@glacier.STANFORD.EDU>
Date: 16 Jul 88 17:16:42 GMT
References: <9160@cisunx.UUCP> <1801@uhccux.UUCP> <807@netxcom.UUCP> <1804@looking.UUCP>  <1812@looking.UUCP> <826@dlhpedg.co.uk>
Reply-To: jbn@glacier.UUCP (John B. Nagle)
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 46


     The following discussion assumes a basic knowledge of the patent process.
If you lack this, and want to know more, read one of the "patent it yourself"
books, such as the one from Nolo Press.

     Although few people patent software, there are considerable advantages
to so doing.  It does inhibit imitators.  First, it tends to scare them off.
They have to face the prospect of litigation.  They may have to report the
prospect of litigation to their stockholders on their 10-K filing to the
SEC and in their annual report, which looks bad.  For publicly held companies,
it can depress the stock price.  For small companies looking for financing,
it scares off venture capitalists.

     Patents have to be taken much more seriously today than a few years
ago.  The Polaroid vs Kodak case scared many executives who used to look
upon losing a patent case as a cost of doing business.  When Polaroid won
that one, Kodak, much to their suprise, was given thirty days to get out
of the instant camera business, which they did.  They were also ordered to
buy back all the Kodak instant cameras ever sold to consumers, and to pay
damages of about $500,000,000 to Polaroid.  The latter two were appealed,
and Kodak lost again.  This ended some careers at Kodak.  When an executive
costs a company a half billion dollars, his career is usually over.

     Further, the patent appeals process has been simplified and improved.
There is now a U.S. Court of Appeals for Patents and Trademarks, sitting
at Washington.  All patent and trademark cases are funneled through that
court, rather than being handled by the usual courts of appeal.  The
new court is composed of patent lawyers, who have technical training.
It is generally considered pro patent-holder; the patent holder wins about
80% of the time there.

     You can patent software.  Some patent lawyers don't know how, though.
See "Advanced Legal Strategies for Software Protection" for a clear discussion
of the subject.  There really has never been a period when one couldn't patent
software, although for a time, the Patent Office viewed attempts to do so 
rather negatively, and patent applications had to be very carefully drafted.
Today, it's not that hard.

     Finally, there are significant tax advantages to owning a patent.
Before tax reform, they were impressive, but even today, they're
significant.

     You also get a really neat certificate when your patent is issued.

					John Nagle

(I hold U.S. Patent #4,740,904.)