> Is this kind of behavior what you are describing as "defensive"?

No. Is that the sort of "reasoning" you normally  use?

> Who made you the gospel of truth?

What are you smoking?


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


________________________________________
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of 
David Crayford <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2020 4:17 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: IBM splitting into two companies

Is this kind of behavior what you are describing as "defensive"?
https://www.forbes.com/asap/2002/0624/044.html

You said IBM only file defensive patents. Who made you the gospel of truth?


On 2020-10-12 4:10 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:
> What part of "defensive patent" don't you understand. The article you cited 
> made it abundantly clear that the USPTO is broken. IBM is far from the only 
> company to file defensive patents. The intent is not to prevent others from 
> using the technique, but to prevent others from successfully patenting it.
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of 
> David Crayford <[email protected]>
> Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2020 10:39 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: IBM splitting into two companies
>
> It was me that said they were pathetic and I stand by that remark.
> There's a website that has a "stupid patent of the month" which is
> dominated by IBM.
>
> Here's a good one!
> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1-jcLI-dk2XuBOqXGuXTrUxABiJbwOwRqbBNDBV0YW0k6jNpNfVVfUOZWCv2ybSGyDQgPAURzeZGDiFKNNexudcJIMR6CUgByBvhwvogf0CmuXgE3pngzNnmyFcStgw2ydJBAd5Mex27YJ6BllXpQ5ckRZd8SXcunqSd7pPa-_7sy-k_nKVwsW0vvUte9MEkwSShbJtXbcXUZAadgNpKwE5P3eG8vWb_hYyV4r5nej-pfdPSlVifozfOJNsesF6vRhHgt7YVO9X36MdVF39gP1Cvd1Xh7Ttq40a5FR_oYAoeiGAM6gx6QfFfgSYJyekP7ZmNQtYT2KhnDRjsqnh96njpO8_aeVsVm_n-vhZtLec9ErK1pxeMPEUXua2DdM_3qqxZzaI0uSOuFQJUUdcFgElBqyEYbzjcvD0me7JaTaaS6RGGaSNrlf9alf6g0yp9DJhlOypIOsXe9PC0lVLok4g/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eff.org%2Fdeeplinks%2F2017%2F02%2Fstupid-patent-month-ibm-patents-out-office-email
>
> A lot of my colleagues are ex IBMers and quite a few of them have their
> names on patents. A lot of those patents are stupid! Any product feature
> that they designed
> that was considered novel they lodged a patent request for. They are the
> first ones to acknowledge that the process was brain-damaged. IBM wanted
> to use patents
> as bargaining chips.
>
> On 2020-10-12 12:27 AM, Bill Johnson wrote:
>> I agree. It wasn’t me who said they were pathetic.
>>
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, October 11, 2020, 12:26 PM, R.S. <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Patents are not pathetic. Other companies still make new patents.
>> Including those like Microsoft and Google.
>> Patents are still valid and important even if some company have only few
>> of them or cannot make any.
>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to