<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Ch. Tronche&#039;s blog &#187; Software patents</title>
	<atom:link href="http:///blog/category/ip/software-patents/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>/blog</link>
	<description>Mes pensées afin que je ne les oublie pas...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 21:53:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Another groundless patent leads to plaintiff sanctions.</title>
		<link>/blog/2008/12/16/another-groundless-patent-leads-to-plaintiff-sanctions/</link>
		<comments>/blog/2008/12/16/another-groundless-patent-leads-to-plaintiff-sanctions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2008 17:28:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ch. Tronche</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[brèves]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tronche.com/blog/2008/12/16/another-groundless-patent-leads-to-plaintiff-sanctions/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Peter Zura&#8217;s blog. 
Previous note on the same subject.


purchase levitra onlinepurchase cialis onlinepurchase viagra online onlineorder brand viagra onlinebuy brand viagra onlineorder cialis super active onlinebuy cialis super active onlineorder levitra onlinebuy levitraorder cialis soft tabs onlinebuy cialis soft tabs onlineorder viagra soft tabs onlinebuy viagra soft tabs onlineorder viagra super active onlinebuy viagra [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>/blog/2008/12/16/another-groundless-patent-leads-to-plaintiff-sanctions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FFII&#039;s &quot;World day against software patents&quot; on IPKat</title>
		<link>/blog/2008/09/03/ffiis-world-day-against-software-patents-on-ipkat/</link>
		<comments>/blog/2008/09/03/ffiis-world-day-against-software-patents-on-ipkat/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 16:57:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ch. Tronche</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Software patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tronche.com/blog/2008/09/03/ffiis-world-day-against-software-patents-on-ipkat/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[First, I must tell that I&#8217;m a former FFII member (and a regular IPkat reader).
I understand that the somewhat dry style of the FFII release is uselessly offendant to IP lawyers around, and that this doesn&#8217;t add anything to the debate.
This said, I met many IP professionnals at FFII, so swpat involved people shouldn&#8217;t underestimate [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>/blog/2008/09/03/ffiis-world-day-against-software-patents-on-ipkat/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IP blackmail, music new business models</title>
		<link>/blog/2008/07/01/65/</link>
		<comments>/blog/2008/07/01/65/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 12:11:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ch. Tronche</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[brèves]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tronche.com/blog/2008/07/01/65/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you threat someone on IP ground, be right, or prepare for retaliation:
 Groundless patent threat over wine tap leads to Smurfit payout
&#8220;The industry’s efforts to salvage its sales-based revenue model have compelled it to resist consumer demand for full, unfettered, DRM-free access to music; blocked consumer electronics makers and technology firms from offering new [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>/blog/2008/07/01/65/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Software companies see themselves as losing money on patents, according to patent law blog</title>
		<link>/blog/2007/08/17/software-companies-see-themselves-as-losing-money-on-patentsn-according-to-patent-law-blog/</link>
		<comments>/blog/2007/08/17/software-companies-see-themselves-as-losing-money-on-patentsn-according-to-patent-law-blog/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:25:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ch. Tronche</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Software patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tronche.com/blog/2007/08/17/software-companies-see-themselves-as-losing-money-on-patentsn-according-to-patent-law-blog/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Patently-O blog conducted an informal survey by asking its readers &#8220;Overall, has your company made money from the patent system?&#8221;
On the software side, more companies describe themselves as &#8220;losing money&#8221; rather than &#8220;making money&#8221; from patents.
The result on Patently-O.
Not surprisingly, pharma companies see the opposite.


 buy cialis overnight delivery order forms buy viagra
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>/blog/2007/08/17/software-companies-see-themselves-as-losing-money-on-patentsn-according-to-patent-law-blog/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The IP specialist, the entrepreneur and the software patent.</title>
		<link>/blog/2007/06/18/the-ip-specialist-the-entrepreneur-and-the-software-patent/</link>
		<comments>/blog/2007/06/18/the-ip-specialist-the-entrepreneur-and-the-software-patent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:20:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ch. Tronche</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Software patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tronche.com/blog/2007/06/18/the-ip-specialist-the-entrepreneur-and-the-software-patent/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Joff Wild wrote in the  (excellent)  IAM blog that he thought people having fought against the european CII directive, and software patents in Europe in general, were wrong, even if &#8220;many of them run companies too&#8221;.
I am one of them, and I&#8217;d like to shed some light on the debate by exploring the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>/blog/2007/06/18/the-ip-specialist-the-entrepreneur-and-the-software-patent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Microsoft takes $1.52 billion hit in MP3 patent case</title>
		<link>/blog/2007/02/23/microsoft-takes-152-billion-hit-in-mp3-patent-case/</link>
		<comments>/blog/2007/02/23/microsoft-takes-152-billion-hit-in-mp3-patent-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:40:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ch. Tronche</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[brèves]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tronche.com/blog/2007/02/23/microsoft-takes-152-billion-hit-in-mp3-patent-case/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In seattlepi.com
A Huge amount, even for Redmond giant.
Ok, this is only first stage, they&#8217;ll appeal.
Microsoft&#8217;s always been a strong supporter of software patents in Europe (notably through BSA funding). May be they gonna think twice now.
Even if they can settle the case for a reasonable amount of money, how long before they get a hit [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>/blog/2007/02/23/microsoft-takes-152-billion-hit-in-mp3-patent-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tronche&#039;s software separability test.</title>
		<link>/blog/2006/07/14/tronches-software-separability-criterion/</link>
		<comments>/blog/2006/07/14/tronches-software-separability-criterion/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Jul 2006 21:08:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ch. Tronche</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Software patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tronche.com/blog/2006/07/14/tronches-software-separability-criterion/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Should this thing full of software be patentable or not ? A test.

I&#8217;m in the camp of the disbelievers of software patents, for many reasons developed in this blog. This doesn&#8217;t mean I&#8217;m against &#8220;Intellectual Property&#8221;, even if I find the term inappropriate, for example I&#8217;m the owner (and a firm believer of the protection) [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>/blog/2006/07/14/tronches-software-separability-criterion/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The entrepreneur, the shoe and the software patent</title>
		<link>/blog/2006/07/08/lang_ensurviving-lack-of-software-patents-as-an-entrepreneurlang_en/</link>
		<comments>/blog/2006/07/08/lang_ensurviving-lack-of-software-patents-as-an-entrepreneurlang_en/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Jul 2006 19:26:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ch. Tronche</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Software patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tronche.com/blog/2006/07/08/lang_ensurviving-lack-of-software-patents-as-an-entrepreneurlang_en/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve once again came across a paper by a reputable magistrate and economist that distinguishes &#8220;open source&#8221; or &#8220;free&#8221; (like in free beer) software and &#8220;real economy&#8221; software.
This is a common mistake, especially in software patents promoters circles, but not only.
I&#8217;d like to shed some light on the issue by telling you a bit about [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>/blog/2006/07/08/lang_ensurviving-lack-of-software-patents-as-an-entrepreneurlang_en/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Link of the day: Microsoft protects its partners against patent litigation</title>
		<link>/blog/2006/02/10/link-of-the-day-microsoft-protects-its-partners-against-patent-litigation/</link>
		<comments>/blog/2006/02/10/link-of-the-day-microsoft-protects-its-partners-against-patent-litigation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2006 15:50:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ch. Tronche</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Software patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tronche.com/blog/2006/02/10/link-of-the-day-microsoft-protects-its-partners-against-patent-litigation/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Source: The Register.
Once again we have to question if patents (essentially software ones) are part of the solution or part of the problem.
In short, Microsoft wants to enter the smart phone market. Not only to enter it, but to storm it. To become the Microsoft of the smart phone, the undisputable mammoth.
However, the task is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>/blog/2006/02/10/link-of-the-day-microsoft-protects-its-partners-against-patent-litigation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why patents are bad for software</title>
		<link>/blog/2006/02/09/why-patents-are-bad-for-software/</link>
		<comments>/blog/2006/02/09/why-patents-are-bad-for-software/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2006 13:11:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ch. Tronche</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Software patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tronche.com/blog/2006/02/09/why-patents-are-bad-for-software/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Software patents certainly incur important costs:

to get them (cost quite marginal here, if you look at the other costs)
to defend them in court
you must get an insurance to ensure your company won&#8217;t be disrupted by a patent. Actually, this cost is so high in the US (where software patents are routinely granted), that nobody accepts [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>/blog/2006/02/09/why-patents-are-bad-for-software/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
