3 ms·
Sure, and then it would be up to the patent holder to prove intentional infringement. Otherwise, they don't get anything. That's how the legal system works in m
by ahomescu1 11y ago
Sure, and then it would be up to the patent holder to prove intentional infringement. Otherwise, they don't get anything. That's how the legal system works in many other situations, the accuser has to prove their accusations, which is perfectly reasonable to me.
- Animats 11y agoPatent infringement doesn't require intent. An "independent invention" defense rewards infringers who keep their technology secret. If the technology is publicly disclosed by an independent party prior to the patent application date, it's not patentable anyway. But secret independent invention is not prior art. Part of the idea behind patents is to reward public disclosure. After the 20 years are up, anybody can do it.
- ahomescu1 11y ago> Patent infringement doesn't require intent. I know, but that's the whole point: maybe it should (in a lawsuit at least).