- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 20:37:42 -0400
On 3/30/10 9:58 AM, Eoin Kilfeather wrote: > If a browser supports it in good faith, and subsequently a troll successfully introduces a > patent challenge, would the consequence not be that the codec would > simply be dropped with the next maintenance release of the browser? IANAL, but as I understand the answer is "it depends". > In fact a court would surely allow a reasonable time for transition. Depends on how one defines "reasonable". Also depends on whether a preliminary injunction is issued; if one is the chances of "reasonable time" seem slimmer to me. > but that is at least a work-flow susceptible to automation. Sort of. Transcoding of a large corpus of video can well take more than a "reasonable time". > I can't see a court giving financial "damages" for infringement of a > patent which hasn't surfaced since<video> was proposed at the end of > 2006. Why not? It's a patent and it's being infringed. Why wouldn't there be financial damages? I think you're being too optimistic about the way patents work nowadays... :( -Boris
Received on Tuesday, 30 March 2010 17:37:42 UTC