proj-imim:
RE: Site closed, and changes
Joost Nieuwenhuijse 2001-Jun-04 20:25:20
Hi,
It's not allowed to use a 'substantial part' of a patent either, to prevent
people from splitting an invention into two parts and distribute them
separately. This can still be seen as infringement.
I guess it's up to judge to decide what 'substantial' means, though.
Joost
> > OK someone correct me if I'm wrong,
> > but too infringe on a patent you have to do the
> > whole process. So if Helmut stops distributing a viewer
> > with his stitcher he would no longer be infringing even if they do get
> > their patent in Europe.
> > Remapping fisheyes too rectilinear images was around before IPIX
> > right.
>
> IANAL, but...
>
> I was thinking the same thing. If IPIX patents a process
> requiring steps A and B to convert and display panoramic
> images, and someone develops software to do step A, that
> person would not be infringing. And if someone develops
> software to do step B, that would not be infringing
> either. Of course somebody who takes these two pieces
> of non-infringing software and combines them is certainly
> at risk of IPIX legal harrassment.
>
> But what if the software for step B became available as
> plug-ins for Netscape, IE, and other browsers. Then the
> users of the step A software could post their panoramas on
> their websites, still without infringing, and anyone who
> visited these sites who had the viewer plug-ins installed
> would have the same experience viewers have today with
> Helmut's PTViewer. So which party would be infringing in
> this case?
>
> Oh, but this is patent law, so it doesn't have to be logical.
>
> It seems it would be too late for IPIX to get a patent
> to cover just step A, or to cover just step B, even if
> there were no prior art, since they have been marketing
> their process for several years (IIRC there is a time limit
> of one year from first commercial availability of an
> invention to apply for a patent; this is probably different
> in Europe from USA, however).
>
> Many thanks to Helmut for his software, and I hope these
> legal problems can be overcome in the near future.
>
> -- Richard
>