Re: Apache to Microsoft: who needs Sender-ID?

[Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


John Andersen writes:
> On Thursday 02 September 2004 03:43 pm, Steve Sobol wrote:
> > Kevin Peuhkurinen wrote:
> > > Yes.   Although Microsoft has refused to disclose what they have
> > > actually applied for patents on, their license only applies to specific
> > > parts of Sender-ID, which seems to imply that they did not apply for
> > > patents on SPF itself.   In any case, it is certainly seems safe to
> > > continue using SPF for now.
> >
> > Considering that they don't *own* SPF, it'd be interesting if they tried to
> > patent it. SPF was created by the CTO (?) (I think CTO) at POBox.com.
> 
> How is it you can file for a patent on something long after it has
> come into common useage and is already available from multiple
> independent sources?

You can file for a patent on anything; the examiners *may* then catch you
out, but there's no incentive for them to do that; and theoretically
someone can challenge a patent after it's granted, but this takes deep
pockets.

Also I believe you can go public with a proposed algorithm or idea for up
to 1 year before applying for a patent on it, in the US system, and
the patent application can be made in secret.

- --j.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS

iD8DBQFBN7k3QTcbUG5Y7woRAiDOAJ9wx85ME9wPn1XS03YONK7vp4PljQCcCnbm
6DxYtRz1eGMZUJAOiWNquL4=
=hxW2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----