Table of Contents

Frequently asked questions about patents and free telephony

Isn't it wrong that people can keep these patents secret?

If I implement something in software outside the USA, I am free from patent problems. Right?

If I build a clean room implementation of some software, I have no patent problems. Right?

If I build a clean room implementation of some software, I have no trade secret problems. Right?

I don't know of any patents applicable to what I am doing, so I am OK. Right?

Software patents only exist in the USA, so I can freely use things like G.729 in Europe. Right?

If I wish really hard, and twist everything people say, then I can come to the conclusion that patents on things like voice compression techniques don't apply to me. Right?

I cannot use the GPL licence on something like a G.729 implementation, because it is patented. Right?

What if I implement something which is patented, purely to teach myself about the subject?

Nobody has pressed any claims so far, so it must be OK. Right?

There is lots of prior art for what I am doing, so I can ignore the bogus patents. Right?

I've read the patent standing in my way, and its full of stuff that is clearly old hat. How can they patent that?

I've read the patent standing in my way, and I only infringe a few of its claims. Does that mean I am OK?

How come publicly available standards have been tied to patented techniques? Doesn't this give the patent holders a monopoly position?

I often see the term "prior art" in relation to patents. What does it mean?

You can't patent pure maths. Compression is pure maths, so how can it be patented?

Software cannot be patented in the EU, right?

Can I freely distribute software using patented techniques in the EU? The software on its own doesn't do anything, right?

If the European Patent Office has issued patents which contravene the rules, can I ignore them?