Re: patents and academia

I think this thread is stale but ...

 

Ignazio wrote:

 

> More to the point of the thread, in which way do you see Dudley's patent 

> as an innovation? Using any of the available technologies he uses as 

> example on his site, I mean? the XML example is equivalent to the use I 

> made of XML in the first project I worked on when I learned it (it used 

> to be online but it's not there any more), meaning there were metadata 

> about people and geolocations, on a web page, passed back and forth and 

> used to perform operations. Mine was a third year project, built by 

> three not exceptionally clever students (/me not exceptionally clever), 

> and the year was 1998 or 1999.

 

1. My patents have a priority (initial filing) date of 1997/Feb/21.

 

2. I have diligently searched and asked people likely to know but I

 have not yet found any evidence of prior art which would invalidate

 the claims in my patent.

 

3. An invention is still an invention regardless of whether the inventor

 is clever or not.

 

4. I like academics, they are often repositories and inventors of marvellous

 ideas but are generally poor at the bloody daily grind of
commercialization.

 And that is OK because there are people who are very good at it.