Pre-Grant Publication Number: 20080209399
Please help the USPTO examine the application by evaluating the relevance of the publicly submitted prior art to the patent application.
Peer To Patent forwards the Top 10 most relevant prior art submissions and their annotations to the USPTO.
Review this prior art and click on the thumbs up (or down) to indicate whether this submission should be forwarded to the USPTO.
If you login then you can add an annotation by typing in the box at the bottom of the screen to comment on the relevance of the prior art to the claims of the patent application.
Review this prior art and click on the thumbs up (or down) to indicate whether this submission should be forwarded to the USPTO.
If you login then you can add an annotation by typing in the box at the bottom of the screen to comment on the relevance of the prior art to the claims of the patent application.
Prior Art Detail
Summary / Description
| Summary / Description | Now that Free and Open Source software has hit the mainstream of the enterprise, businesses need to be certain that they are not taking on legal liabilities with the code. There are many licenses, and making sure a company is abiding by them all is complex. That's one reason you are hearing so many voices calling for simplifying and settling on fewer licenses. But it goes deeper than that. |
Basic Information
| Type of Prior Art | Online Publication |
| URL | http://lwn.net/Articles/138248/ |
| Author/Creator | Pamela Jones |
| Title | IP Software Compliance Tools -- Who Needs Them and Why? |
| Publication Date | June 1, 2005 |
| Publisher | lwn.net |
| Directions to Document Location | |
| Additional Information | |
Notes / To Do
| Notes | |
Excerpt
Excerpt After their software evaluates the code matches, Palamida assigns a CodeRank number to the matches |
Relevance
Claims
11
Relevance
If a coderank is low, then the code has been effectively "flagged" as not infringing a copyright. The claim should also be objected to as having insufficient support in the written desription.
If a coderank is low, then the code has been effectively "flagged" as not infringing a copyright. The claim should also be objected to as having insufficient support in the written desription.
Claim Chart
All
17
Relevance
If a coderank is low, then the code has been effectively "flagged" as not infringing a copyright. The claim should also be objected to as having insufficient support in the written desription.
If a coderank is low, then the code has been effectively "flagged" as not infringing a copyright. The claim should also be objected to as having insufficient support in the written desription.
Claim Chart
All
18
Relevance
If a coderank is low, then the code has been effectively "flagged" as not infringing a copyright. The claim should also be objected to as having insufficient support in the written desription.
If a coderank is low, then the code has been effectively "flagged" as not infringing a copyright. The claim should also be objected to as having insufficient support in the written desription.
Claim Chart
All
0 days left
