Subject: Re: [Freesw]
From: "Frank BENNETT (フランク ベネット )" <>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 09:38:46 +0900

On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:14:44PM -0600, Richard Stallman wrote:
>     It seems to me that a searchable database of prior art is actually
>     useful for the purpose of showing that a patent shouldn't have been
>     granted.
> It is useful for us to have the ability to search the database for
> that purpose.  But why offer the facility to possible patent
> applicants?

[Response of Brian Fox noted]                                        

I don't see how the no-cooperation view squares with evidence that the PTO has
been pushed by the Court to expand the scope of things that can be patented.
If the CAFC is more patent-happy than the PTO, and if it's prohibitively
expensive to have cases decided there, why make efforts to be driven to that
extremity?  Put another way, would not the principle that the enemy of my
enemy is my friend apply here?

Frank B