4 ms·
Yes, knowledge of a patent could increase damages if you are found to be infringing. However, ignorance of all patents causes Fear Uncertainty and Doubt at the
by ynniv 17y ago
Yes, knowledge of a patent could increase damages if you are found to be infringing. However, ignorance of all patents causes Fear Uncertainty and Doubt at the slightest mention of the an overly broad patent title. Knowledge of the patents in your field is the only way to avoid infringing them. I used to believe that ignorance was the better path, but that only leads to you being sued over something you were unaware of. Now I opt to avoid being sued in the first place.
- prodigal_erik 17y agoThat works if it's actually possible to avoid infringing all overbroad patents. But the USPTO's bar for "novel and non-obvious" is so absurdly low that I don't believe we can assume they left us any gaps in the minefield.
- ynniv 17y agoTrue. Throughout the blog post and comments here, I never mentioned that I am not in favor of software patents, but I absolutely agree. That said, there is usually some way to weasel out of the shadow of a patent, and being sued for a smaller outrageous amount isn't as useful as not being sued at all.
- gojomo 17y agoBut reading can cause anxiety and wasted effort engineering around claims that may never be enforced, and may never hold up if enforced. Patent text is in its own arcane language, which takes significant time and effort to understand. (It is easy for skilled engineers to think they understand, but not.) For developers without professional patent training, unless they've received a credible allegation (or lawsuit) of infringement from a patent-holder, or other business strategy considerations require them to do a patent survey, reading controversial patents is all cost, no benefit. This is especially true when the title or abstract piques interest.