[Asterisk-Users] G.729 licensing/patent?

[Steven Critchfield]

On Thu, 2004-10-21 at 23:51 +0200, Damjan wrote:
> This is getting slighlty off-topic, but is also an import issue for any
> free-software project ... and, I'd say for the greater population. 
> "The patents that came to destroy us" saga :)
> 
> > > The laws in norway currently don't allow patenting algorithms as with
> > > many other countries. Does this mean I can use G.729
> > > (http://www.vovida.org/applications/downloads/G729A/) without bothering
> > > the license?
> > 
> > First of all, the patents that concern G.729 are *not* for algorithms.
> > They are for signal processing apparatus. At least that is what the
> > patent applications claim and on which grounds those patents have been
> > granted. Had the applications claimed algorithms, the patents would
> > not have been granted in the first place. It is a matter of
> > interpretation by the examiner at the relevant patent office. The
> > examiner bought the story that the claims were for apparatus, not
> > algorithms, and as a result the patents were granted and are legally
> > in force.
> 
> It seems that the current practise is that until a court validates a
> patent its not really "in force". The reason for this is that patent
> offices have not done their job and grant most of the patent
> applications, so its up to courts and civil suits to settle the patent
> issue. 
> Ofcourse being sued by a big corporation is not on the agenda for
> most people - thats why most people want to stay away from patents,
> however hard that is...

Seems like your second paragraph contradicts the first. If people avoid
anything in a patent to keep out of court, the patent was a force to
deal with. 

If a patent was to be used in a court case and nothing ill happened, it
is weakened. If it was ruled invalid, then it is no longer a force. As
long as someone can whip out the paper work and file a suit, it is "in
force". 
-- 
Steven Critchfield <critch at basesys.com>