That's exactly my point. When someone holds a patent and believes another company is violating that patent, it is not just a matter of accusing. They have to proof to what extent the patent has been violated, and in response the other party has the obligation to prove otherwise.
But furthermore I believe these issues are no-go discussion (such as your for-loop example) since those are concepts that are established as public domain knowledge. No one can patent such things, since there's no work of innovation in implementing a for-loop. You *can* patent a new concept you develop for agile programming, but you can't patent agile programming (unless you came up with it in the first place.) Wikipedia puts it nicely: "Public domain comprises the body of knowledge and innovation (especially creative works such as writing, art, music, and inventions) in relation to which no person or other legal entity can establish or maintain proprietary interests within a particular legal jurisdiction. This body of information and creativity is considered to be part of a common cultural and intellectual heritage, which, in general, anyone may use or exploit, whether for commercial or non-commercial purposes." I think it is very clear that programming patterns on which CakePHP relies upon are part of the public domain and are not subject to be patented. -MI --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember, smart coders answer ten questions for every question they ask. So be smart, be cool, and share your knowledge. BAKE ON! ________________________________________ De: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En nombre de Trevor Burton Enviado el: Lunes, 18 de Diciembre de 2006 09:46 a.m. Para: [email protected] Asunto: Re: Legal Concerns Regarding CakePHP and Cake Software Foundation The argument in this thread seems to suggest that if i hold a patent then i can go and accuse anyone i like of infringing it and force them to provide proof that they aren't... as we all know proving a negative can be a somewhat tricky procedure. This suggests, though, that if i received a letter from the solicitors of a company who had managed to patent the for-loop that i'd have to go through the process of proving they hadn't - which is the responsibility of the people who issue the patents in the first place.... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cake PHP" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
