|
There are only 15,935 residents!
Just guessing here, but a shop has got to need to make a profit of what? £60,000pa to cover the costs of two staff, plus business rates, rent, electricity?
That's not a lack of kinky locals, it's a lack of business sense!
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
and 20k sheep, just maybe they hadnt been told that the sheep didnt get paid!
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nah - that is the Midwich Flock! 
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: Nah - that is the Midwich Flock!
But they don't look anything like cuckoos!
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: the residents she was trying to cater to just were not “kinky” enough.
Funny
|
|
|
|
|
I am not asking for legal advice. Ok, now that everyone's butt has been covered....
I've gotten very curious about why some of my articles have gotten a very high amount of traffic, so I started poking around. It turns out that one of my articles[^] is referenced in U. S. Patent #8296730[^], held by Microsoft. Presumably, Microsoft would not have filed this patent if they did not expect to see some kind of commercial return on it.
Question 1: Does the Code Project use license permit for-profit use of the articles that people post here?
Question 2: Would I be entitled to any financial gain that Microsoft might see from this patent, seeing as my work is a reference to the patent? (Ignore, for the moment, the issues involved in trying to initiate a patent dispute with M$.)
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
The CodeProject Open License is summarized here and detailed here. I'd say go review those and make your own conclusions, but from what I can tell there aren't the sort of restrictions you seem to be implying for that license.
|
|
|
|
|
Do you really want to talk about the legal stuff, or do you just want everyone to know your work is referenced by a patent held by Microsoft?
Cos that sounds pretty cool to me. 
“I believe that there is an equality to all humanity. We all suck.” Bill Hicks
|
|
|
|
|
What I'm looking for are thoughts on whether or not it would be of any use speaking to a patent lawyer about this.
|
|
|
|
|
Me think it is legal; the patent is about COM, not .NET.
But you could send a cease and desist letter to Microsoft (with CC to the patent office); but I would not, I would be proud if an article I wrote was used as a reference for a patent.
Anyway, you unfortunately and probably do not have the resources to go to court against them (money and time and effort).
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
You can patent a derivative work, as long as it is unique enough. When you file a patent, you have to list any citations you know of. The patent examiner may add more, though if the citation were to fully describe the new invention, the patent wouldn't be granted. The question is whether the citations are complete and enough to fully describe the invention or make it obvious. This list can get both long and extremely obscure. Being cited generally increases the value of a patent and perhaps other sources as well, however that's as far as it goes. If being cited in a patent implied a monetary relationship, the entire system would become untenable.
So, the answer to Question 2 is no.
|
|
|
|
|
Not all patents are for generating profit, in some cases (Think Apple’s rounded corner buttons) they are to prevent others from making money.
In my limited experience it is common practice, at least in medical device field, to reference papers written by Doctors to support the validity of a patent idea.
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
No idea if it is or isn't. I would, however, add it to my resume/cv asap.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
Those who seek perfection will only find imperfection
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
me, in pictures
|
|
|
|
|
It looks like your article is about how to use the extension methods that Microsoft themselves have implemented for Visual Basic. From the footnote in the patent application, it would appear that the patent writer was simply using your article as a reference for how these methods might be used. I think you should just sit back and be happy that Microsoft's attorney included a reference to your article.
As far as getting any money from Microsoft, I think even if you could afford to bring some kind of action, you'd be hard pressed to show that anything in your article would entitle you to compensation. I mean, if there were an innovation there that Microsoft was leveraging in their invention, then you might be able to claim that there was prior art (i.e. you thought of it first) and so the patent is invalid. But really, your article is all about Microsoft's extension methods. So the sequence was: 1) They invented it (perhaps up for dispute, but that's a separate matter) 2) They commercialized it, then 3) You wrote an article about how to use it. Nice, but not different than any other article about how to leverage any technology.
The citation in the patent application is no different than any other citation unless they're making claims about an invention of yours (which would be weird and unlikely). We really can't go around and sue everyone who cites our articles  .
|
|
|
|
|
I figured this would be the case, but if I hadn't inquired....
Thanks for the info, everyone, I appreciate the perspective.
|
|
|
|
|
If you can prove that you published the "invention" or IP before someone filed a patent for it - you have what is known as "prior art".
It wouldn't be the first time they've done this....
What country are you in?
|
|
|
|
|
Since his article is about the use of Microsoft's invention, it definitely could not be prior art.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, if is for a new a novel way of using an existing thing that could possibly be prior art - not for the invention itself but for using it in a certain way.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
True, but the patent involved was not for a particular way of using extension methods, it was for the idea itself. And Gregory's article was a useful, but not particularly novel, sharing of what he had learned about how to use it.
|
|
|
|
|
Rene Pilon wrote: If you can prove that you published the "invention" or IP before someone filed a
patent for it - you have what is known as "prior art".
However all that does is invalidate the patent.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it just invalidates the patent. It still doesn't give you any rights.... you'll have to go through the same process ... however... there is "copyright" vs "patent"..
The thing is - do you have the money to go head to head with a giant over an extended period of time 
One guy in South America stuck it through and he was eventally paid off if I recall correctly.
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory.Gadow wrote: Presumably, Microsoft would not have filed this patent if they did not expect to
see some kind of commercial return on it.
That isn't a given. Some companies, include MS, patent things to insure that someone else doesn't patent it and then tries to sue for infringement.
|
|
|
|
|
Do you have any punscriptions?
Any and all puns are welcome. Let the punflaming begin!
Loading signature...
. . . Please Wait . . .
|
|
|
|
|
A pun is spontaneous. It is utterly inappropriate to ask for a pun war. You shall be punished.
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Do not feed the troll ! - Common proverb
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
