In a message dated 4/21/00 12:02:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
EdGrenda@aol.com writes:
<< Mr. Pollak asked, "Does this preclude the use of the technology?" Yes,
starting right after the injunction or the trial if the claims are found to
interfere. >>
Of course anybody can sue anyone about anything. But does the suit have
merit? From what I have heard about the Objet it's basically a Cubital with a
different printing system. Those things have been sold in the past without
much controversy. In these days of rapid technological change some might
question the usefulness of patents. If something is going to be obsolete in 3
years what good is 17 year claim? Now with GATT and WTO etc. You might have
to patent it in every country in the world to really get protection. Spending
all your money on lawyers instead of development would in the long run be
self defeating perhaps. I don't remember the details, maybe the Auto guys
would, but as I recall when the automatic transmission was invented (by
Chrysler?), they were forced to make the design available to all the other
manufacturers because it was such a useful invention, patent not
withstanding. Then recently, 3D was about to lose their suit with EOS, a
blatant knock off IMHO. Their only real defense was to buy the competition.
If the Japanese really wanted into the US market they would buy 3D. Then we
might see some interesting machines. At least several people have actually
seen an Objet, making parts no less. That is a good sign unlike the Aeroflex.
History has shown that if a product is really superior to the existing
technology, people will find a way to get it, patents, trademarks,
copyrights, etc., notwithstanding. And in this day of global information and
international trading I would expect that trend to accelerate.
Andy Scott
Lockheed Martin Aero
For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 23:03:20 EEST