Amen, Andy. Except...

The expiration of a non-disclosure agreement doesn't grant any IP rights.
You still can't give away what you don't own.

--Tom Rogers  VP-R&D  Time Tech Inc.


-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Warren <fastfwd@IX.NETCOM.COM>
To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: Tuesday, November 11, 1997 4:39 AM
Subject: Re: Microchip sues Scenix and parallax


Rick Sherman wrote:

> > Microchip Technology Inc. has filed suit against Scenix
> > Semiconductor Inc. and Parallax Inc., alleging infringement of
> > six patents related to Microchip's 8-bit PIC MCU architecture.

and Tjaart van der Walt <tjaart@wasp.co.za> replied:

> I was waiting for this. I you can't beat 'em, sue 'em. How
> predictable. If Microchip spent the money they are wasting on making
> lawyers rich on engineers, everybody (except said lawyers) would
> benefit.
>
> C'mon guys, you can sue Scenix, but you won't have enough fingers to
> plug all the holes. If the technology is within reach of a small
> company like Scenix, others will follow.

    Jesus, Tjaart... Give it a rest.

    What do you suppose patents are FOR?  If owning a patent doesn't
    give you the right to sue people who infringe upon it, what
    rights DOES it give you?

    If "the technology is within reach of a small company like
    Scenix" only because (as Microchip has alleged) they've
    infringed on Microchip's patents or been given confidential
    information from someone prohibited from disclosing it, then
    Microchip SHOULD be granted the remedies for which they've asked.

    And your argument that Microchip should spend its money on
    engineers rather than on lawyers is specious at best... I mean,
    what's the POINT of spending money on engineers if you can't
    protect their work?

    I'll admit that Steve Sanghi appears to have read Andy Grove's
    book and taken notes... His paranoia (I use the word in the same
    sense as Grove does) seems rather extreme.  However, it IS his
    job -- his ONLY job -- to make his company as profitable as
    possible, and vigorous defense of its intellectual property is
    necessary to achieve that goal.

    Personally, I see some problems with Microchip's position... For
    example, some of the patents (like number 5,473,758) may be
    judged invalid if this case ever goes to trial.

    Also, Microchip claims that Parallax improperly used information
    it acquired under NDA "three years ago".  Every Microchip NDA
    that _I've_ ever signed has had a confidentiality period of only
    three years... If Parallax DID use any information covered by the
    NDA, they may prove in court that they waited until the day
    after the NDA expired to do so.

    Nevertheless, these issues have no bearing on the question at
    hand, which is "Is Microchip doing the right thing by bringing
    suit against Scenix and Parallax?".  Personally, I think they
    are... If for no other reason than that they don't have a
    choice.

    -Andy

=== Andrew Warren - fastfwd@ix.netcom.com
=== Fast Forward Engineering - Vista, California
=== http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2499