Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase «««12345»»

Software Patents Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Friday, January 31, 2014 6:28 AM
Right there with Babe

Right there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with Babe

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, April 10, 2014 11:06 AM
Points: 733, Visits: 1,869
Our patent offices have really lost sight of:

'non obviousness'--really how can one NOT say that 1 click shopping, encrypting purchases or emailing a scanned image are obvious!

Limited scope, specifity-- patents are getting successfully applied to technologies that DID NOT EXIST when the patent was filed. BTW I have patented an anti-gravity flying machine, if anyone figures out how to build it, they owe me big royalties.

On the mirror side of the limite scope issue, it seems that prior art is often not considered relevant it it does not directly use the same technology as the patent. This is a bizarre one way interpretation: if a prior art is not exactly the same, it's patentable, but if it's patented, if an implementation is not exactly the same it's still a violation.

And don't even get started on 'business model patents'.

Really if the PTO actually started making patenting represent real tangible contributions rather than a bunch of stuff for lawyers to get employed, many of our problems would be resolved.


...

-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
Post #1536755
Posted Friday, January 31, 2014 12:35 PM
Right there with Babe

Right there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with Babe

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, April 10, 2014 11:06 AM
Points: 733, Visits: 1,869
Interesting tidbits. An outfit that claims to hold patents on podcasting and playlists (based on the fact that the inventor operated a cassette by mail operation years ago) has subpoenaed EFF for a complete list of all donors to it's anti patent troll campaign.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/01/podcasting-patent-troll-fighting-eff-wants-donors-names/

And someone else who claims to have a patent on download before release movie viewing:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/01/meet-the-inventor-of-the-week-patent-troll-owns-pre-release-digital-movies/


These are NOT people whose inspiration produced something new. They did nothing whatsoever creative (except file legal papers). In both these cases if my comments above were applied more vigorously to EXISTING patent law, we would not have these problems.


...

-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
Post #1536934
Posted Tuesday, February 18, 2014 12:35 AM
Forum Newbie

Forum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, February 24, 2014 9:51 PM
Points: 5, Visits: 6
I favor software patent laws.The time is different now,we are in the world, where every other big industry is now making a disastrous use of patent laws which prevents the smaller one to become successful.In such a case, I believe, It is a compulsion to patent the ideas if you are at the initials stage or about to apply your ideas.
Post #1542396
Posted Tuesday, February 18, 2014 8:31 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 10:15 AM
Points: 32,779, Visits: 14,938
teresalinus (2/18/2014)
I favor software patent laws.The time is different now,we are in the world, where every other big industry is now making a disastrous use of patent laws which prevents the smaller one to become successful.In such a case, I believe, It is a compulsion to patent the ideas if you are at the initials stage or about to apply your ideas.


Except that isn't what happens in many cases. In many cases the basics of software building are compromised because so many things are patented that small companies can have a hard time building software. They can't afford to license the "obvious" software parts that have been patented.







Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1542610
Posted Tuesday, February 18, 2014 9:17 AM


UDP Broadcaster

UDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP Broadcaster

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:40 PM
Points: 1,477, Visits: 4,281
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (2/18/2014)
teresalinus (2/18/2014)
I favor software patent laws.The time is different now,we are in the world, where every other big industry is now making a disastrous use of patent laws which prevents the smaller one to become successful.In such a case, I believe, It is a compulsion to patent the ideas if you are at the initials stage or about to apply your ideas.


Except that isn't what happens in many cases. In many cases the basics of software building are compromised because so many things are patented that small companies can have a hard time building software. They can't afford to license the "obvious" software parts that have been patented.

I don't know how the patent process works, but it seems to me that before a pending patent is awarded, it should be approved by a panel made up of a revolving pool of industry experts. The process shouldn't be entirely driven by lawyers on the side of the applicant and clerks on the side of the patent office. I know that patent office clerks have expertise in one more areas and are trained in how to do stuff like research pending patents, but the process really should involve industry peer review.



"Winter Is Coming" - April 6, 2014
Post #1542643
Posted Tuesday, February 18, 2014 9:20 AM


SSCarpal Tunnel

SSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal Tunnel

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 8:20 AM
Points: 4,862, Visits: 2,243
Eric M Russell (2/18/2014)
...
I don't know how the patent process works, but it seems to me that before a pending patent is awarded, it should be approved by a panel made up of a revolving pool of industry experts. The process shouldn't be entirely driven by lawyers on the side of the applicant and clerks on the side of the patent office. I know that patent office clerks have expertise in one more areas and are trained in how to do stuff like research pending patents, but the process really should involve industry peer review.

Sounds interesting. Now that's a strategy that could work.


Gaz

-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
Post #1542644
Posted Tuesday, February 18, 2014 10:23 PM
Forum Newbie

Forum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, February 24, 2014 9:51 PM
Points: 5, Visits: 6
Eric M Russell (2/18/2014)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (2/18/2014)
teresalinus (2/18/2014)
I favor software patent laws.The time is different now,we are in the world, where every other big industry is now making a disastrous use of patent laws which prevents the smaller one to become successful.In such a case, I believe, It is a compulsion to patent the ideas if you are at the initials stage or about to apply your ideas.


Except that isn't what happens in many cases. In many cases the basics of software building are compromised because so many things are patented that small companies can have a hard time building software. They can't afford to license the "obvious" software parts that have been patented.

I don't know how the patent process works, but it seems to me that before a pending patent is awarded, it should be approved by a panel made up of a revolving pool of industry experts. The process shouldn't be entirely driven by lawyers on the side of the applicant and clerks on the side of the patent office. I know that patent office clerks have expertise in one more areas and are trained in how to do stuff like research pending patents, but the process really should involve industry peer review.


But the thing is we should try to find the solutions and not to focus on problems. Simply, I would say that if the patent law is providing so many privileges to the big industries then they could be helpful to the small firms. The only thing is to; find the ways for patenting the ideas. They have competent patent experts who suggest them the best possible ways to patent the inventions and help them to compete with the other big Industries. We lack these experts and in turn lack the success.
Post #1542861
Posted Thursday, February 20, 2014 4:15 AM
Forum Newbie

Forum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, February 24, 2014 9:51 PM
Points: 5, Visits: 6
teresalinus (2/18/2014)
Eric M Russell (2/18/2014)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (2/18/2014)
teresalinus (2/18/2014)
I favor software patent laws.The time is different now,we are in the world, where every other big industry is now making a disastrous use of patent laws which prevents the smaller one to become successful.In such a case, I believe, It is a compulsion to patent the ideas if you are at the initials stage or about to apply your ideas.


Except that isn't what happens in many cases. In many cases the basics of software building are compromised because so many things are patented that small companies can have a hard time building software. They can't afford to license the "obvious" software parts that have been patented.

I don't know how the patent process works, but it seems to me that before a pending patent is awarded, it should be approved by a panel made up of a revolving pool of industry experts. The process shouldn't be entirely driven by lawyers on the side of the applicant and clerks on the side of the patent office. I know that patent office clerks have expertise in one more areas and are trained in how to do stuff like research pending patents, but the process really should involve industry peer review.


But the thing is we should try to find the solutions and not to focus on problems. Simply, I would say that if the patent law is providing so many privileges to the big industries then they could be helpful to the small firms. The only thing is to; find the ways for patenting the ideas. They have competent patent experts who suggest them the best possible ways to patent the inventions and help them to compete with the other big Industries. We lack these experts and in turn lack the success.


Let me try to answer your question in a very simple way.Suppose you have an idea, for example a mobile application, which you find worthy and therefore you disclosed it.Any of the user present on web can copy it or publish it claiming it as their own Idea.In such a case you denied with the access to your ideas.There are some legal terms like software patents which helps you to own your ideas legally.
Post #1543396
Posted Thursday, February 20, 2014 8:06 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 6:58 AM
Points: 280, Visits: 1,781
teresalinus (2/20/2014)

Let me try to answer your question in a very simple way.Suppose you have an idea, for example a mobile application, which you find worthy and therefore you disclosed it.Any of the user present on web can copy it or publish it claiming it as their own Idea.In such a case you denied with the access to your ideas.There are some legal terms like software patents which helps you to own your ideas legally.


Abstract ideas cannot be patented.
Post #1543519
Posted Thursday, February 20, 2014 8:22 AM
Right there with Babe

Right there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with Babe

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, April 10, 2014 11:06 AM
Points: 733, Visits: 1,869
patrickmcginnis59 10839 (2/20/2014)
teresalinus (2/20/2014)

Let me try to answer your question in a very simple way.Suppose you have an idea, for example a mobile application, which you find worthy and therefore you disclosed it.Any of the user present on web can copy it or publish it claiming it as their own Idea.In such a case you denied with the access to your ideas.There are some legal terms like software patents which helps you to own your ideas legally.


Abstract ideas cannot be patented.


That's what we're told. But when people (trolls) actually DO get patents on scanning to email, music playlists, releasing movies to subscribers before they hit theaters, automatically encrypting purchasers information for online sales (Even having Whitfield Diffie testify about the history of encryption did not save Newegg)... that does not seem to be the case.

The common sense meaning of 'abstract idea' does not seem to mean what we think it means.

[all of the above are currently in the courts, some have already produced substantial licensing money]

It is simply become far to risky for entrepreneurial folks these days. I can guarantee you that Kickstarter is scanned daily from sleazy lawyer trolls to big name entities like Rockstar-- just looking for someone else to target.


...

-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
Post #1543535
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase «««12345»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse