Software patents, what's your take?
-
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/06/want-abolish-software-patents-tell-us[^] Personally I think software patent holders have made more billions than anyone else. :)
“Be at war with your vices, at peace with your neighbors, and let every new year find you a better man or woman.”
-
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/06/want-abolish-software-patents-tell-us[^] Personally I think software patent holders have made more billions than anyone else. :)
“Be at war with your vices, at peace with your neighbors, and let every new year find you a better man or woman.”
Some points. First of all, your post title doesn't match the item you link to - your title is an absolute, whereas the post is an aspiration. Second. When you post a link, it's better to actually include something that tells us what your position on the matter is. Third. It's very unlikely that patents will be abolished. There's just too much money to be made and too many vested interests for this to be viable. Fourth. Protection of patents can be a very good thing. Suppose you run a small business and you patent an idea. Now, Google comes along and does something based off your work and doesn't pay you. Patents protect you so that you can be remunerated when someone else uses your work. Finally. This applies to one country. If you wanted to abolish patents, you would have to abolish patents worldwide.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
-
Some points. First of all, your post title doesn't match the item you link to - your title is an absolute, whereas the post is an aspiration. Second. When you post a link, it's better to actually include something that tells us what your position on the matter is. Third. It's very unlikely that patents will be abolished. There's just too much money to be made and too many vested interests for this to be viable. Fourth. Protection of patents can be a very good thing. Suppose you run a small business and you patent an idea. Now, Google comes along and does something based off your work and doesn't pay you. Patents protect you so that you can be remunerated when someone else uses your work. Finally. This applies to one country. If you wanted to abolish patents, you would have to abolish patents worldwide.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
Very meticulous analysis!
-
Some points. First of all, your post title doesn't match the item you link to - your title is an absolute, whereas the post is an aspiration. Second. When you post a link, it's better to actually include something that tells us what your position on the matter is. Third. It's very unlikely that patents will be abolished. There's just too much money to be made and too many vested interests for this to be viable. Fourth. Protection of patents can be a very good thing. Suppose you run a small business and you patent an idea. Now, Google comes along and does something based off your work and doesn't pay you. Patents protect you so that you can be remunerated when someone else uses your work. Finally. This applies to one country. If you wanted to abolish patents, you would have to abolish patents worldwide.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
Suppose you run a small business and you patent an idea. Now, Google comes along
.. patents the idea as well but with slightly different text, and then sues your arse. With a top-end lawyer who will win regardless of who is right.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
Protection of patents would have been a very good thing if they actually worked the way they're supposed to work.
-
Some points. First of all, your post title doesn't match the item you link to - your title is an absolute, whereas the post is an aspiration. Second. When you post a link, it's better to actually include something that tells us what your position on the matter is. Third. It's very unlikely that patents will be abolished. There's just too much money to be made and too many vested interests for this to be viable. Fourth. Protection of patents can be a very good thing. Suppose you run a small business and you patent an idea. Now, Google comes along and does something based off your work and doesn't pay you. Patents protect you so that you can be remunerated when someone else uses your work. Finally. This applies to one country. If you wanted to abolish patents, you would have to abolish patents worldwide.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
Thanks for those points, I must admit the original title was misleading. I for one think it's not possible to abolish software patents. From your stipulated points I think you must have some software patents. :)
“Be at war with your vices, at peace with your neighbors, and let every new year find you a better man or woman.”
-
Thanks for those points, I must admit the original title was misleading. I for one think it's not possible to abolish software patents. From your stipulated points I think you must have some software patents. :)
“Be at war with your vices, at peace with your neighbors, and let every new year find you a better man or woman.”
No, but I'm always hopeful.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
-
Some points. First of all, your post title doesn't match the item you link to - your title is an absolute, whereas the post is an aspiration. Second. When you post a link, it's better to actually include something that tells us what your position on the matter is. Third. It's very unlikely that patents will be abolished. There's just too much money to be made and too many vested interests for this to be viable. Fourth. Protection of patents can be a very good thing. Suppose you run a small business and you patent an idea. Now, Google comes along and does something based off your work and doesn't pay you. Patents protect you so that you can be remunerated when someone else uses your work. Finally. This applies to one country. If you wanted to abolish patents, you would have to abolish patents worldwide.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
Suppose you run a small business
I had to look into the process of software patents, and it is insane. If you manage to do all the research, file the correct forms, to the correct people, at the correct time, its still no guarantee. Beyond that, you really need to hire a patent lawyer to make sure that the language you use will actually protects you ($$$$). With the large corps and patent trolls making a killing being ruthless and meticulous in their litigation process, small business doesn't stand a chance in enforcing or defending their patents. About the only thing its good for is to pad your resume, gloat to friends, and being able to put a 'patent pending' sticker on the box (it takes a long time to get a patent approved). I agree that your sentiments are how patents should work, but it isn't how things actually happen. (don't even get me started on patent transfer... I think patents should only protect the inventor, not the people with more money)
Be The Noise
-
Some points. First of all, your post title doesn't match the item you link to - your title is an absolute, whereas the post is an aspiration. Second. When you post a link, it's better to actually include something that tells us what your position on the matter is. Third. It's very unlikely that patents will be abolished. There's just too much money to be made and too many vested interests for this to be viable. Fourth. Protection of patents can be a very good thing. Suppose you run a small business and you patent an idea. Now, Google comes along and does something based off your work and doesn't pay you. Patents protect you so that you can be remunerated when someone else uses your work. Finally. This applies to one country. If you wanted to abolish patents, you would have to abolish patents worldwide.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
Fourth. Protection of patents can be a very good thing. Suppose you run a small business and you patent an idea. Now, Google comes along and does something based off your work and doesn't pay you. Patents protect you so that you can be remunerated when someone else uses your work.
I seriously doubt that is significant scenario in the US now. It is possible that it isn't even measurable say at less than 1% of claims and definitely less than %1 in terms of monetary value. And I am including all patents in that remark. Even some of those "small" claims are suspicious in terms of the intent of the filing in the first place. The point was after all to encourage industry (actual product creation) rather than idea protection. I can only remember one single case to which your scenario applies and that was a company that made tools to carve pumpkins and which some big box retailer infringed on. Even excluding patent trolls there are hundreds which are applied for no other reason than restraint of trade. And one need look no further for abuse than to see the patents being bought specifically to insure that suit will not be brought against any company employing the idea (or at least until the owning company gets bought.)