-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 67
Add support for representing patent information #597
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: 1.7-dev
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Steve Springett <steve@springett.us>
Signed-off-by: steve.springett <steve.springett@servicenow.com>
@planetlevel would you be able to review this? We have worked with WIPO on providing summary information for patents and patent families and we believe our current support for both of these are correct. Let us know otherwise. However, I'm particularly interested in a review of the patent assertions which allow BOM creators to assert their relationship with the patent (owner, licensing, etc). |
Hi Steve,
I spent some time with this, and it looks pretty comprehensive. For all my
experience with patents (IP degree from G'town, drafted several patents for
big companies at a lawfirm, have 7-8 of my own)... I guess my patent
experience has been pretty simple relative to these complex scenarios.
Sorry I thought I could be more help here,
…--Jeff
410-707-1487
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 2:17 PM Steve Springett ***@***.***> wrote:
@planetlevel <https://github.com/planetlevel> would you be able to review
this? We have worked with WIPO on providing summary information for patents
and patent families and we believe our current support for both of these
are correct. Let us know otherwise. However, I'm particularly interested in
a review of the patent assertions which allow BOM creators to assert their
relationship with the patent (owner, licensing, etc).
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#597 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAUUFTHRYGRI6F6OVTPFO3D2TXQNZAVCNFSM6AAAAABW3U24E6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDOMJRGQ2DMMJQHA>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
[image: stevespringett]*stevespringett* left a comment
(CycloneDX/specification#597)
<#597 (comment)>
@planetlevel <https://github.com/planetlevel> would you be able to review
this? We have worked with WIPO on providing summary information for patents
and patent families and we believe our current support for both of these
are correct. Let us know otherwise. However, I'm particularly interested in
a review of the patent assertions which allow BOM creators to assert their
relationship with the patent (owner, licensing, etc).
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#597 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAUUFTHRYGRI6F6OVTPFO3D2TXQNZAVCNFSM6AAAAABW3U24E6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDOMJRGQ2DMMJQHA>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
…est case Signed-off-by: Steve Springett <steve@springett.us>
Signed-off-by: Steve Springett <steve@springett.us>
@jkowalleck do you know what's up with the Java checker? It's failing on the valid-standard-1.7 test file, which is not part of this PR, and was never failing previously to my knowledge. Also, the PHP one is not returning any useful information, just a generic error. |
did not look into details of this PR, but is suspect the XSD changes are breaking things unintentionally.
|
Signed-off-by: Steve Springett <steve@springett.us>
Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for the guidance. |
Signed-off-by: Steve Springett <steve@springett.us>
Signed-off-by: Steve Springett <steve@springett.us>
Implements patent support. Closes #596
TODO/DONE