All -
I spend some part of my time dealing with IPR and patent issues WRT OGC
standards. Oh what fun! Never thought I would be able to carry on a
meaningful dialogue with a patent lawyer.
Anyway, in the Geo space, most patents are frivolous. There is a tremendous
amount of prior art in the GIS industry. The problem is that many companies
that apply for patents in the geo space have no idea of what has been done
before. The problem is exacerbated by a US Patent Office (or should I say
policy) that simply cannot properly evaluate all the patents being applied
for.
This said, it is hard to determine whether the IP 911 patent meets the
requirements for a patent. Below my signature is a really nice synopsis (I
must confess I wrote this so I hope it is correct!) of what constitutes a
valid patent under US law.
So, in terms of the IP 911 patent, the real issue is whether 1.) there is
relevant and significant prior art and 2.) whether the use of GPS for VoIP
EM calls is innovative.
In terms of the use of GPS, there have been similar (non-VoIP) applications
for many years. The mobile wireless industry has been deploying GPS based
applications with similar applications (fleet management, mobile work force
and so forth)
Cheers
Carl
The scope of the protection provided by the patent is defined by its claims.
Similarly, the validity of the patent depends on the definition of the
invention provided by the claims. If the invention as defined by the claims
does not meet the requirements for patentability (in particular, if it was
not new, or would have been obvious at the priority date of the patent
application), then the patent is invalid and may be revoked.
Therefore, when analysing a patent to assess either whether it is infringed
or whether it is valid, it is essential to turn to the definition of the
invention provided by the claims, with any ambiguity in the terminology used
in the claims being resolved by reference to the description.
As indicated previously, in order for a patent claim to be valid, the
invention defined by that claim has to meet two criteria: it has to be novel
(new) and inventive (not obvious). These criteria have to be judged against
information that was publicly available at the priority date of the patent
application. Any information that was in the public domain prior to that
date is known as "prior art" and may be relevant to the validity of the
patent. Any information that became public only after that date does not
constitute prior art and does not affect the validity of the patent.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Art Botterell" <>
To: "Emergency_Mgt_TC TC" <>
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: [emergency] Geolocation E911 Patented
> <rant>
>
> "When ideas are property, only trespassers will have ideas." [(tm) ;-)]
>
> Sometimes our Patent Office reminds me of a needy child... acting out
> more and more outrageously until somebody intervenes.
>
> Fundamentally, of course, the problem is with the somewhat strained
> metaphor of "intellectual property." It's original intent was to foster
> creativity by allowing creators to reap the rewards of their efforts.
> But as copyrights and patents have become longer-lived, both in absolute
> terms and relative to the accelerating rate of change, the tool has
> turned against the craftsman: Intellectual property claims are becoming a
> major barrier to creativity.
>
> Alas, with the bumper-sticker ideology of an "ownership society" so much
> in vogue right now, it's hard to challenge anything that's called a
> property right, even when it was only a convention meant to achieve an
> entirely different goal.
>
> </rant>
>
> - Art
>
>
> On Jul 6, 2005, at 7/6/05 1:07 PM, Ham, Gary A wrote:
>
>> Where is the logic that even allows a patent on this concept? It is a
>> realtively simple algorithm that I believe is "prior art" in all kinds
>> of systems. Am I missing something special that they have done? Or are
>> they just theives trying to take advantage of the gullible and foolish?
>>
>>
>> Gary A. Ham
>> Senior Research Scientist
>> Battelle Memorial Institute
>> 540-288-5611 (office)
>> 703-869-6241 (cell)
>> "You would be surprised what you can accomplish when you do not care who
>> gets the credit." - Harry S. Truman
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kon Wilms [mailto:]
>> Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 4:37 PM
>> To:
>> Subject: [emergency] Geolocation E911 Patented
>>
>>
>> More proof why the patent system doesn't work. I wonder who they will
>> attempt to extract cash from first?
>>
>> Cheers
>> Kon
>>
>> -- snip
>>
>> IP911 Resource has been awarded a patent for S911, its e911 solution for
>> VoIP service providers. The technology uses a GPS device to pinpoint
>> the exact location of a caller based on longitude, latitude, and
>> altitude. After, location
>> software and database comparisons are used to find the
>> address of the emergency and the nearest public safety
>> location and phone number to route the VoIP emergency.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>> generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
>> OASIS
>> at:
>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>> generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
>> OASIS
>> at:
>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
> OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
