Reply to post: Re: I have said it before

Fairytale for 2019: GNOME to battle a patent troll in court

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: I have said it before

That wouldn't really work when you look at the original point of patents - I.e., a way to protect the inventor *while* they develop a product and bring it to market.

If a patent holder isn't developing technologies or products from a patent or actively licensing said patent to others, it should be voided. If no such work or licensing has been evidenced within two years of a patent being granted, it should be voided. Voiding should be undertaken automatically by the patent office if the holder does not produce such evidence themselves within the two year limit (and every two years subsequently to prove progress/ongoing work).

Additionally, patents should only be granted if they do actually bring significant improvement and genuine competitive advantage to a product or service. E.g., I wouldn't buy a phone *just* because it has rounded corners.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon