Re: [GENERAL] New MS patent: sounds like PG db rules

Dave Page wrote:

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Justin <justin@emproshunts.com> wrote:   

Dave Page wrote:  Having been involved in lawsuits, i wish it was a laughing manner.  Thinking a patent is unenforceable is dangerous thinking.  MS could target the leaders of the community along with the corporate sponsors.     

 Well as one of those people, working for one of those companies, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. The fact is that Microsoft do have vaguely sane lawyers and I have little doubt they would do some elementary research before trying to claim that  our 10 year old (probably much older in fact, as I believe there was a rules system in the code inherited from Berkley) feature infringes their 2 year old patent. Whilst it is true it could get expensive if they did try, I don't believe they will as they would ultimately end up with egg on their faces and would likely cost them real money and be the cause of significant bad press.    

I'm not losing any sleep over it either and you may be very right.  But don't bet on the side intelligent/logical thinking to coming out of a lawyer who's on retainer to a big corporation like MS.  Postgresql is luck in the fact US patent laws are still based on the idea first to invent not first to patent which several countries have gone to.