undefined | Better HN

0 pointsfreejazz1y ago0 comments

>Of course, if indeed AWS came to a very similar implementation themselves, as the jury found, then that further suggests that the idea is not that novel.

That wouldn't matter if AWS came to the very similar implementation on their own, after the Plaintiff's patent was issued (and became public information). Patent, unlike copyright, does not allow for independent invention/creation. If you come to, on your own, something already covered in a patent during its term, then you infringe.

0 comments

tsimionescu1y ago

Yes, it doesn't matter for determining if you are infringing on the patent. But it does matter for (a) the kinds of damages that you can be liable for, and (b) it can matter if you try to attack the patent itself to try to get it invalidated. Patents are only supposed to be granted for non-obvious ideas, so one way of attacking a patent is to show that many people came up with that idea independently, which is a strong argument that the idea doesn't pass the non-obviousness test and can get the patent invalidated.

freejazzOP1y ago

Yes, they can be evidence that invalidates a patent if they qualify as prior art.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsfreejazz1y ago0 comments

>Of course, if indeed AWS came to a very similar implementation themselves, as the jury found, then that further suggests that the idea is not that novel.

0 comments

tsimionescu1y ago

freejazzOP1y ago

Yes, they can be evidence that invalidates a patent if they qualify as prior art.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse