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

[Kevin Walsh]

Benjamin on Asterisk Mailing Lists [benjk.on.asterisk.ml at gmail.com] wrote:
> > Now, if someone had designed a chip that infringed the patents
> > then the registered patents would be enforceable.  This is the real
> > reason for using "an apparatus" in the claims.  In countries that
> > don't allow software and mathematical patents, "an apparatus" can
> > only mean hardware, and cannot be enforced against a software
> > implementation.
> >
> Don't worry about that because they may sue you nonetheless and the
> lawsuit will then bankrupt you anyway. You remind me of the guy on
> whose tombstone is written "Run over by a truck at a zebra crossing.
> His last words were 'But I have priority here!'"
> 
Judgements, in England, are not automatically granted to the person
who can write the biggest cheque.  A claim that "that software violates
my patent" wouldn't even make it to court.  If, by some miracle, it did
make it to court then it'd most likely get thrown out within the first
five minutes.

Under English law, the loser has to pay all reasonable legal costs
incurred by the winner, which helps to avoid nuisance cases from being
filed in the first place.

Your views are biased upon the ridiculous legal system used in the US
courts, where favourable judgements are only awarded to those who can
afford them.  You can't buy judgements in England.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we've been over this before.  Perhaps
we should simply agree to disagree before some Muppet decides to step
in and embarrass himself with another $0.02 donation.

-- 
   _/   _/  _/_/_/_/  _/    _/  _/_/_/  _/    _/
  _/_/_/   _/_/      _/    _/    _/    _/_/  _/   K e v i n   W a l s h
 _/ _/    _/          _/ _/     _/    _/  _/_/    kevin at cursor.biz
_/   _/  _/_/_/_/      _/    _/_/_/  _/    _/