[8502] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Patents, etc.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bruce Gingery)
Sun Nov 21 09:00:14 1993
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1993 06:46:44 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Gingery <lcbginge@antelope.wcc.edu>
To: "Tansin A. Darcos & Company" <0005066432@mcimail.com>
Cc: Privatizing the Internet <com-priv@psi.com>
In-Reply-To: <0119931121075100/0005066432NA1EM-c100000@MCIMAIL.COM>
On Sun, 21 Nov 1993, Tansin A. Darcos & Company wrote:
[ much omitted from enormous quotes ]
> >From: Paul Robinson <TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM>
> Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
> -----
> Then perhaps you need to argue either for compulsory licensing or
> mandatory use clauses. Compulsory licensing would mean anyone can buy a
> license for some fee, fixed by law. Mandatory use says that a patent
> becomes available for use by anyone under even less stringent terms if the
> owner fails to put the patented product into production and keep it in
> production.
Then we are back to square one -- Just like has been done several times
with likely independent discoveries of the efficient "water fueled" engine.
The most recent time I've seen it, was on a "Beyond 2000" segment, about
a month ago, as I recall. It's been reported in the various popular
press outlets time after time -- NEVER RETRACTED -- and never produced.
The only thing that ever hit the market was a water "additive" used
to smooth combustion, marketed for several years about a decade ago.
Software with "manditory production" on a software patent would
cause the holder to revert to copyright and trade secret -- perhaps a
good thing.
Bruce Gingery lcbginge@antelope.wcc.edu
