3 ms·
Giving a perpetual royalty free license to anything you may ever patent for the rest of your life because of a subtle loophole in a license that people aren't g
by jwecker 13y ago
Giving a perpetual royalty free license to anything you may ever patent for the rest of your life because of a subtle loophole in a license that people aren't generally aware of is, IMO, new and outrageous, irrespective of the utility (or lack thereof) of software patents.
- nknighthb 13y agoA "subtle loophole in a license" is practically a contradiction in terms. Courts don't enforce unlikely interpretations that run counter to the reasonable (and documented!) expectations of most if not all parties concerned just because some lawyer walks into a courtroom and announces they want to interpret it that way. Law is not a programming language, and it's not enforced by computers. If anything, the change that was made by the company here is even worse because it's obviously ambiguous. What exactly does it mean for a patent claim to "exist"? Are we talking about patents already granted? Patents filed? Patents that might be filed?