[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: Question regarding Microsoft patent on file synchronization

From: Tom Malia <tommalia_at_ttdsinc.com>
Date: 2007-04-23 22:10:46 CEST

Isn't it the case though that whether a patent should or should not have
been issued, once it HAS been issued, the burden of proof (so to say) is now
on the party accused of violating the patent and not the patent holder?

I'm no lawyer by any means, but I'm just curious. Seems like that
regardless of it's original merits, does the fact that they now actually
have the patent mean that they can potentially make serious trouble?

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Reibert [mailto:svn@reibert.com]
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 12:13 AM
To: Karl Fogel
Cc: Sean McCarthy; users@subversion.tigris.org; dev@subversion.tigris.org
Subject: Re: Question regarding Microsoft patent on file synchronization

On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 12:10 -0700, Karl Fogel wrote:
> In my professional opinion, this patent should not have been granted.

That would imply some capability to separate the oats from the manure, a
task for which our famous USPTO has shown little propensity.


Mark S. Reibert, Ph.D.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Apr 23 22:11:10 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.