Replies

Actually, swordmaker, patent law doesn't require a defense to maintain a patent. I think you're thinking of trademark law, which is similar in many respects.

I realize that. . . my point was that it DOES take the pro-active defense of your patent to protect it. If the owner does not sue the infringer, the patent is worthless. Unfortunately, a patent infringement suit is very expensive. The patent office will not protect it. Not pursuing it can effect how a court will enforce it as well. Unequal enforcement can effect how the court will value it.

Even the most thorough patent searches can miss obscure claims in non-related patents. That's where a lot of these patent trolls live. Broadly written Claims in unrelated patents that can be construed to be applied to something unrelated.

I realize that. . . my point was that it DOES take the pro-active defense of your patent to protect it. If the owner does not sue the infringer, the patent is worthless. Unfortunately, a patent infringement suit is very expensive. The patent office will not protect it. Not pursuing it can effect how a court will enforce it as well. Unequal enforcement can effect how the court will value it.

Absolutely. I guess I was quibbling over terminology. You're correct that the patent office doesn't proactively seek infringers, so not doing so yourself can effectively make the patent worthless until you do so.

IMO, the patent system is largely broken. Apparently the powers that be like it that way. It keeps the small independent folk in check, and gives additional leverage to industry giants. Software patents should, by and large, not exist at all.