RE: Question regarding Microsoft patent on file synchronization

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.
svn@reibert.com
----------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org