3 ms·

Yes. The parent post to which I responded said The date of the patent application is the determining date for a patent. when discussing whether or not he could

Yes. The parent post to which I responded said The date of the patent application is the determining date for a patent. when discussing whether or not he could be sued post-issue and that is not true. There are 2 dates, the date a patent is filed (which determines term) and the date a patent was issued (which determines rights). Infringement taking place between the date of filing and the date of issue cannot be retroactively litigated in spite of the fact that it occurred during the term of the patent. The main issue is that there are 2 dates for a patent, and the post to which I responded gave an answer with no clarity or regard for the disparity and seemed to indicate that the OP could be liable for retroactive infringement which is untrue. It is just dangerous when people here on HN give advice on patent law issues. They are very complex. This is similar to if you went to a lawyer forum and they all claimed to be experts on web technologies, dishing out bad advice (ASP is totally the way to go these days, that ruby on rails thing I hear is a virus that breaks email printers. Therefore, always use Microsoft servers.), but the consequences here are more dire. If you saw lawyers saying that, you'd probably have a brain aneurism.

Symmetry 15y ago
You thought they discussing whether someone could be sued post-issue for actions between the patent application and the patent issue? I assumed he had been talking about whether someone could be sued for providing a service even if they had begun providing that service before the patent was granted. Now that I reread the discussion, however, I can see that text itself is rather ambiguous and that I had just assumed the interpretation that made sense to me. It seems another poster came to the same conclusion I did, since he pointed out that its the date of invention that the online service would have to precede, not the date of filing.

Symmetry 15y ago

You thought they discussing whether someone could be sued post-issue for actions between the patent application and the patent issue? I assumed he had been talking about whether someone could be sued for providing a service even if they had begun providing that service before the patent was granted. Now that I reread the discussion, however, I can see that text itself is rather ambiguous and that I had just assumed the interpretation that made sense to me. It seems another poster came to the same conclusion I did, since he pointed out that its the date of invention that the online service would have to precede, not the date of filing.