Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1WmSct-0005U8-2y for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 19 May 2014 18:49:31 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.214.177 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.177; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f177.google.com; Received: from mail-ob0-f177.google.com ([209.85.214.177]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WmScr-0000mf-3M for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 19 May 2014 18:49:31 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-f177.google.com with SMTP id wp4so6399183obc.8 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; Mon, 19 May 2014 11:49:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.33.131 with SMTP id r3mr38467802obi.40.1400525363530; Mon, 19 May 2014 11:49:23 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.71.162 with HTTP; Mon, 19 May 2014 11:49:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgRhEJUT4JEXtZSqnNnBV=tLFD4qjLFOQpeA-V2jA_UtHg@mail.gmail.com> References: <BAY173-W1475F72C70BC089A82C20FCC300@phx.gbl> <5377892C.8080402@gmail.com> <CAAS2fgS-Ewj3T0-d=h7ET9dCz3+NPPYVOLDWd7T7oYY95x-sUA@mail.gmail.com> <CALDj+Bbsb6JiLabTBx21k02dDvnmZZDCXmJ2mnh7DngBon202w@mail.gmail.com> <5379FF38.4050909@certimix.com> <20140519144709.GA29574@netbook.cypherspace.org> <CANEZrP3sDh3Q9T0xFi7maNQR9Z6R7gQ6vT5kjchcMkD0hMHOdw@mail.gmail.com> <CAAS2fgRhEJUT4JEXtZSqnNnBV=tLFD4qjLFOQpeA-V2jA_UtHg@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 20:49:23 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Gj8L1fqXynqKAuhOzaOufraEZdI Message-ID: <CANEZrP0T1SMoVPLS6PgbN04S9gdfqAzF4+8mMG5Njifa8v=w6w@mail.gmail.com> From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2d26ccad3e304f9c53834 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1WmScr-0000mf-3M Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] patents... X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 18:49:31 -0000 --001a11c2d26ccad3e304f9c53834 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Avoiding willfull infringement no longer requires paying off a > patent attorney to get a freedom to operate review. This isn't to say > that reading patents is always productive That case raised the bar a bit, but the core problem remains - if you learn about a patent you definitely violate (and there is very likely to be at least one and possibly many), via whatever means, then by continuing business you become a wilful violator. Which makes sense: how could it be any other way? It still never makes sense to read patents. You can only lose. --001a11c2d26ccad3e304f9c53834 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo= ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c= cc solid;padding-left:1ex">Avoiding willfull infringement no longer require= s paying off a<br> patent attorney to get a freedom to operate review. =C2=A0This isn't to= say<br> that reading patents is always productive</blockquote><div><br></div><div>T= hat case raised the bar a bit, but the core problem remains - if you learn = about a patent you definitely violate (and there is very likely to be at le= ast one and possibly many), via whatever means, then by continuing business= you become a wilful violator. Which makes sense: how could it be any other= way?</div> <div><br></div><div>It still never makes sense to read patents. You can onl= y lose.</div></div></div></div> --001a11c2d26ccad3e304f9c53834--