http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/05/05/microsoft-exploits-loophole-in-patent-law-and-what-you-can-learn-from-this/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=microsoft-exploits-loophole-in-patent-law-and-what-you-can-learn-from-this Freshly Brewed Bio/Pharma Chat. Served Up Daily. Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:57:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/05/05/microsoft-exploits-loophole-in-patent-law-and-what-you-can-learn-from-this/comment-page-1/#comment-42919 Sanjaya Maniktala’s Power Supply Blog » I’ll teach ya (”MAD” or “SAD”) Sat, 23 Feb 2008 16:59:16 +0000 http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/05/05/microsoft-exploits-loophole-in-patent-law-and-what-you-can-learn-from-this/#comment-42919 [...] http://patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/05/05/microsoft-exploits-loophole-in-patent-law-and-what-you... [...] [...] http://patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/05/05/microsoft-exploits-loophole-in-patent-law-and-what-you... [...]

]]> http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/05/05/microsoft-exploits-loophole-in-patent-law-and-what-you-can-learn-from-this/comment-page-1/#comment-7154 Anonymous Sun, 06 May 2007 16:00:37 +0000 http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/05/05/microsoft-exploits-loophole-in-patent-law-and-what-you-can-learn-from-this/#comment-7154 This post is not worthy of patent baristas. It contains so many inaccuracies and is just plain illogical. For one, to say that Microsoft exploited a loophole is ridiculous. The truth is that AT&T should have had foreign patent protection, but instead tried to stretch U.S. patent law to cover what had always been beyond the reach of U.S. patent law - making things in foreign countries. The Supreme Court got it right. But reasonable minds can differ on the result. The real problem with this post is the inaccuracies - saying that the only reason the golden master is not used is because it is a backup. Yikes. That is totally wrong. The master disk contains the object code that is sent to OEMs and serves as a template to make disks that are then loaded onto foreign computers. The master disk is the software information embodied in a tangible medium to provide the information necessary to create the foreign made disks. It is not a "back-up." The author concludes "A computer manufacturer could not just as easily used the golden master as a component." Maybe it is time to read about the case. The parties stipulated that the golden master was never combined with any computer. Even if it was that would be ONE component. Not the millions of copies made abroad. Respectfully, since it is just plain poorly researched and written, I would pull the post asap. This post is not worthy of patent baristas. It contains so many inaccuracies and is just plain illogical. For one, to say that Microsoft exploited a loophole is ridiculous. The truth is that AT&T should have had foreign patent protection, but instead tried to stretch U.S. patent law to cover what had always been beyond the reach of U.S. patent law – making things in foreign countries. The Supreme Court got it right. But reasonable minds can differ on the result. The real problem with this post is the inaccuracies – saying that the only reason the golden master is not used is because it is a backup. Yikes. That is totally wrong. The master disk contains the object code that is sent to OEMs and serves as a template to make disks that are then loaded onto foreign computers. The master disk is the software information embodied in a tangible medium to provide the information necessary to create the foreign made disks. It is not a “back-up.” The author concludes “A computer manufacturer could not just as easily used the golden master as a component.” Maybe it is time to read about the case. The parties stipulated that the golden master was never combined with any computer. Even if it was that would be ONE component. Not the millions of copies made abroad. Respectfully, since it is just plain poorly researched and written, I would pull the post asap.

]]>