Written by Steve Lake
Posted on: 07.06.2009 at 12:52pm
Section: Editorials
I was going through my forums today, cleaning out spammer accounts (They're pesky little rats. Why can't they find better things to do than make our lives miserable?) when I happened to stumble onto a rather fascinating post by a gentleman with a username of "libdave".
From what I could gather from his post, his method of patent nullification and indemnification is quite simple and could really be done in a single blanket effort if all else failed. Here's what he wrote:
No need for legislation, no need for lawyers. If I were a coder on a, say Linux, project and M$ accused me of using 'patented' code, I would create an negative averment affidavit, something along the lines of:
I see no evidence that M$ has any patentable code and I do not believe that any exists.
Sign it and send it to the M$ registered agent (at least one in Washington (I'm not sure if it needs one in each state were it does business)) under notary seal, and give it 3 days to respond/refute.
This put it in a bind, it must come forth with the evidence or it agrees with you by non-response. Of course if it *does* come forth with evidence (patentable code) then you have something to work around. Presuming it t does not refute the statement then have the notary issue a certificate of non-response which you could record in the local court house.
It is all commercial law. It works for us as well as them.
I remember him posting this a while back, but I guess it didn't really hit me until now how simple, and yet brutally effective this would be. Microsoft (or any other company for that matter) would be forced to show their hand with this simple trick.
Once they've exposed which patents they claim Linux (or any FOSS app) infringes on, the programmers could get to work coding around the patents. Of course, this assumes that the Bilski decision hasn't already rendered them null and void anyways.
Either way we put MS and other FUD generating companies over a barrel. They either show us what patents, if any, are being infringed, and we simply code around them. Or else we force them to shut their mouths and end their FUD mongering. Either way, we win. And the best part is, once we're done, if these companies continued their patent threats, the EFF and the FSF could sue those companies for slander.
Just think of the counter FUD effect that would have. Microsoft and other Anti-Linux companies would open their mouth, spew some retarded FUD about Linux infringing patents, and then get sued for slander and lose. Can you imagine how hard that would hit them? It'd do Linux such a service that you'd easily see a huge boost in Linux adoption, because the FUD would be dead (or at least greatly unicated) and OEM's would be less likely to bow to Microsoft's pressure and avoid Linux.
The only thing then is to get people trained and understanding what Linux is and how to use it. But that's another fight entirely. -_-;;