{"id":35,"date":"2012-04-18T00:02:00","date_gmt":"2012-04-18T00:02:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.maclawran.ca\/twitter-create-the-defensive-patent-foundatio"},"modified":"2012-04-18T00:02:00","modified_gmt":"2012-04-18T00:02:00","slug":"twitter-create-the-defensive-patent-foundatio","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.maclawran.ca\/?p=35","title":{"rendered":"Twitter – create the Defensive Patent Foundation now!"},"content":{"rendered":"

I’ve been having a nice quiet time, not a lot going on to upset me.  Until this morning when I read the latest via HackerNews http:\/\/news.ycombinator.com\/<\/a> about The Innovator’s Patent Agreement: https:\/\/github.com\/twitter\/innovators-patent-agreement\/blob\/master\/innovators…<\/a><\/p>\n

Twitter is trying to create a sort of ‘patent which can’t be used to hurt anyone’ – from the preamble of their agreement:<\/p>\n

“WHEREAS Company and the Inventors believe that software patents should only be used to make a positive impact in the world and, accordingly, should only be used for defensive purposes”<\/strong><\/p>\n

It’s essentially a patent assignment document.  These documents are interesting because, in the US inventions are invented by people; not companies.  They can be *assigned* to companies, which often happens, but the inventor generally gets to keep their name on the patent.  (Of course Edison has everyone working in his labs assign all their patents to him, but that’s another post entirely).<\/p>\n

So here’s what they consider a “Defensive Purpose”<\/p>\n

An assertion of claims of the Patents shall be considered for a “Defensive Purpose” if the claims are asserted:<\/strong><\/p>\n