MELP quality

fizteh89 wrote:
> As we already know (from last discussion here), Compandent doesn't have
> any patents on the MELPe standard.
> And copyright protection does not work in case of a clean-room
> engineering.
> So, what IPR can they possibly have in MELPe to be entitled to any
> royalties ?
> Trade secrets ?  Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha....................

Like I said, in Russia they don't educate people about IPR, then they 
come to the US with their own ignorance and misperception and get in 
troubles...

Good luck go ahead and infringe on their IPR willfully...

I wonder if you will really laugh should you been trying your own 
theory... Ha Ha Ha.....

>Like I said, in Russia they don't educate people about IPR...

Right, they did not  - no need for freaking IPR under the Communist
Party rule.

>Good luck go ahead and infringe on their IPR willfully...

I am afraid it might be the other way around...

BTW, your answer to 10.1 Q is just plain wrong: ask any good IP lawyer
to fill you in.
And in case you can't afford it just ask on misc.int-property: they
will give you free advice...

Blah Blah Blah, cost nothing huh?

I guess I'll just wait how the first sucker get sued by them, will it be 
you Dmitry?


fizteh89 wrote:
>> Like I said, in Russia they don't educate people about IPR...
> 
> Right, they did not  - no need for freaking IPR under the Communist
> Party rule.
> 
>> Good luck go ahead and infringe on their IPR willfully...

I am a law abiding citizen of this great country, Oded...

I have nothing to be sued for by anybody, unlike some other people and
even some large companies...  (I don't include your beloved Compandent
here: with all due respect, it's just insignificant...)

If somebody wants to make some new improved sdMELP (super duper MELP)
Compandent's "IPR" would be the least of all concerns.
The main hurdle would be some basic patents held by some well-known
company located down in the South...
Fortunately, all patents do expire someday, some sooner, some later...