Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 18:48:12 01/08/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 08, 2004 at 12:41:21, Ed Trice wrote:
>Hello Christophe,
>
>>
>>You should not rest on this.
>>
>>The fact that there is a patent does *not* mean that it is valid.
>>
>>It is a known fact that the US office of patents has stopped long ago to check
>>anything in the patents they grant.
>>
>>You ask for a patent, they give it to you. They don't check anything.
>
>Umm...no. The patent received an initial rejection, called a 102 or 103
>rejection, I forget which.
Is the fact that an initial version of the patent proposal has been rejected
supposed to convince us that the patent is valid now?
The US Office of Patents registers crap. Your first version must have been worse
than crap. Congrats.
>It is said they flat out reject 90% of the patents just for the hell of it.
>
>They cited Gollon from 1977 showing an 80 square board (Capablanca's) then I had
>to prove mine to be unique.
>
>I am not sure where you get your misinformation, did you just make that up?
>
>:)
When you wrote this I'm sure you thought you had a point (BTW this sentence has
been patented in 2002 by Chessfun, and I am using it without permission - Oops
she's gonna sue me now).
If I wanted to write a Gothic Chess program, I would definitely *not* purchase
any license from anybody.
But don't worry, I won't write a Gothic Chess program.
Christophe
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.