In article <3dd278fd$1@news.povray.org>,
 "Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote:

> Ideally, patents should be restricted to genuine innovations (bye-bye 
> Amazon's one-click), but in the end you can't reasonably exclude the 
> courts from a dispute, and as soon as you've done that, it will 
> inevitably come down to who can afford the most expensive lawyers.

The cost of the lawyers would be irrelevant if the loser payed the fees, 
ideally it would happen this way: big company sues smaller competitor 
over obviously frivolous patent, little company hires lawyers just as 
good as the big company's, the patent gets overturned and the big 
company pays the bill. Or: little parasite threatens other companies 
with lawsuits, but instead of paying because they can't afford 
otherwise, they defend themselves.

-- 
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message