Author: Keith Evans
Date: 12:12:17 01/08/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 08, 2004 at 01:48:21, Slater Wold wrote: >Tomorrow, under Section 302 of 35 U.S.C., I will be asking the USPTO to >reexamine your patent, with more than enough proof to sustain that you do not >'own' the variant, nor the method. I still find it disgusting that you quote >Capablanca in your Backgroud, yet give no mention of his ideas on changing the >game. Slate, What would be your motivation to do this? If you busted the patent would you then do a bunch of work on Gothic chess? If not then why bother? There are many dubious patents granted, so why spend the time to attempt to bust this particular patent? One of my engineer friends used to work with Nick Tredennick (think 68000) and made good money busting patents. One case in particular is sort of funny. Around 1990 Motorola sued Hitachi for patent infringement, and Hitachi then started invalidating various Motorola patents until Motorola gave in and dropped the lawsuit. This busting was all based on undisclosed prior art. Both of the parties involved had some obvious $$$ motivation here. BTW - This friend has had many chances to get his name on various patents, but doesn't want to be called into court to defend any patents, so he refuses to have his name listed on any patents. He also doesn't like to have his picture taken, so there may be a larger psychological issue at work here ;-) -Keith
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.