home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky sci.crypt:6148 misc.legal:21713
- Newsgroups: sci.crypt,misc.legal
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!agate!ames!purdue!yuma!csn!teal!bhayden
- From: bhayden@teal.csn.org (Bruce Hayden)
- Subject: Re: PGP use Ethical and Legal Questions
- Message-ID: <bhayden.725170881@teal>
- Sender: news@csn.org (news)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: teal.csn.org
- Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
- References: <1992Dec23.010544.5369@cbnews.cb.att.com> <1h9hnlINN5vm@uwm.edu> <1992Dec23.210202.8199@netcom.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 04:21:21 GMT
- Lines: 28
-
- strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
-
-
- >Rick Miller makes a couple of legal arguments, that I, as a fellow
- >non-attorney, think incorrect.
-
- >1. He asserts that until a patent is tested in court its status
- >is indeterminate. I think this is a misstatement of law. I believe
- >the law is that until a patent is overthrown in court it is valid.
- >That's a very different matter, and leads to such things as
- >retrospective damages from the time of the verdict.
-
- Patents are presumtively valid. However, this presumption can be,
- and often is overcome. In particular, some of the presumption is
- lost if you can show lack of candor with the PTO (failure to disclose
- material information to them).
-
- However, note that just because you have successfully defended a
- patent, doesn't mean that you are off the hook. A finding of validity
- usually has no estoppel value against someone who was not a party to
- the previous suit. This means that you have to reprove the validity
- each time it is challenged. Lose once though, and the patent is
- invalid thereafter.
-
- Bruce E. Hayden
- (303) 758-8400
- bhayden@csn.org
-
-