| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| 'The patent, used as a sword' |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-10-08 09:24:52 |
| The failing US patent system is getting ever more mainstream - The New York Times is running a long and details piece on the failings of the system, especially in relation to the technology industry most of us hold so dearly. Most of the stuff in there isn't new to us - but there's two things in the article I want to highlight. |
|
| RE[5]: Can anyone justify such a system ? |
| By smashIt on 2012-10-08 19:36:40 |
|
> 5,127 prototype designs between 1979 and 1984) thats 3 designs a day sounds more like a bad case of brainstorming to me |
 - Score: 3 |
| RE[8]: Can anyone justify such a system ? |
| By _txf_ on 2012-10-08 20:35:27 |
|
> except that i'm not an author, and a sw is an industrial product resulting from a development process and containing technical and design features, more like a car than a book... now, the car as an industrial object is patentable at all levels (from the suspension strut arrangement to materials The concept of the steering wheel is not patented. Specific implementations of struts or suspension systems are patented. Unfortunately sw patents are not patents on implementations. They're patents on the concept. |
| - Score: 6 |
| Suing Facebook, LinkedIn, Broadvision, and Novell |
| By modicr on 2012-10-08 23:56:08 |
|
Just look at the following analysis: http://seekingalpha.com/article/... Anything is possible with IP companies. IP licensing addresses a huge market, and according to the World Intellectual Property Organization 2011 report, the annual global IP licensing market has grown from $2.8 billion in 1970 to $180 billion in 2009. That figure should be well above $200 billion by now. There's a lot of IP pirating going on which should diminish in the coming years as patent holders claim their legal rights. ... The 232 patent: Method and system for making document objects available to users of a network. The 974 patent: Framework for managing document objects stored on a network. The 241 patent: Method for users of a network to provide other users with access to link relationships between documents The 971 patent: Method for searching document objects on a network. Edited 2012-10-08 23:57 UTC |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[5]: Can anyone justify such a system ? |
| By JAlexoid on 2012-10-09 00:26:59 |
|
Yeah. Software patents would lay claims to a bagless vacuum cleaner not a specific design. But all manufacturers have very different designs that happen to be bagless. That is where hardware patents make sense - they tend to be very specific. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[4]: Can anyone justify such a system ? |
| By JAlexoid on 2012-10-09 00:34:50 |
|
> in the previous piece you're advocating for the interim abolition of sw patents, thus for engineers in the sw field to become 2nd class citizens when it comes to intellectual property protection... So are all artists, singers, writers and performers. You know... the people that have copyright protection and not patent protection. Oh wait... but they're not second class citizens!!! > investigating the involved maths Yep. Patenting the application of maths... What's next? Patents on using the plus sign to add two values of cash deposit value and account value in the bank? Brillant! You should become a patent lawyer. > what incentive do i have to come up with it first? what incentive do i have to come up with it at all? Being first to market? On the other hand, what incentive does an artist have creating a new genre? I meran, someone will take it an just copy it!!! Oh the horror!!! |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[6]: Can anyone justify such a system ? |
| By JAlexoid on 2012-10-09 00:43:31 |
|
> the thing is, not always, not forever So you want the monopoly forever now? > there's no such thing as obvious stuff, otherwise it would have existed since the dawn of time - but actually it hasnt, and took some guy (who most likely didnt think he was doing something obvious at the time) to materialize Total BS! Obvious does not mean that everyone just knows. Obvious had a very specific definition - a person skilled in the art could replicate the invention without prior knowledge of said invention. And "tada!" most of the stuff that is covered by software patents is like that.(And pretty much is a response to most of the rest of your comment) |
| - Score: 4 |
| RE[8]: Can anyone justify such a system ? |
| By JAlexoid on 2012-10-09 00:50:34 |
|
> but then why only those working on sw shall be degraded to second class industrial world citizen and deserve lesser consideration than their colleagues from other fields, just because they happeen to use a keyboard? FYI: SW engineers enjoy the broadest level of protections of all engineering fields. Today it's both copyright and patents. In addition to being able to apply for patents for concepts and vague descriptions of "inventions". In addition to application of the laws of nature. Imagine if BMW would hold a patent on fuel burn rate calculation(direct application of laws of physics) in the internal combustion engine? Yet, you were implying in your other comment that you should be able to get a patent on a similar thing by being a software engineer. I'm sorry to say, but you are an overpriveledged ****. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[3]: Can anyone justify such a system ? |
| By JAlexoid on 2012-10-09 00:54:29 |
|
Unfortunately the IP wars today are much more ridiculous than the ones surrounding photocopying.(No one was laying claim to the frequencies of light used by the machine) I specifically cracked up from the blatant lie coming from the Apple exec saying that it took them years to perfect scroll to unlock... Seriously? Scroll to unlock and years? |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE: Comment by jared_wilkes |
| By JAlexoid on 2012-10-09 01:01:12 |
| No it does not. Just adding the patent sales and adding Moto's sale would easily blow through $20bn. That is not including $1bn is Samsung's loss and other smaller things. |
| - Score: 2 |
| Comment by Luminair |
| By Luminair on 2012-10-09 01:08:29 |
|
why does anyone deserve the government policing their ideas for them? justice? the government of the people defending the individual? why does any organization deserve government policing the ideas of the individual for the organization above and beyond protections for the creator? what is the justice in that? |
| - Score: 4 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |