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 Thursday, February 20, 2014 10:46 AM


SSCrazy Eights

SSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy Eights

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 5:06 PM
Points: 8,713, Visits: 9,259
My feeling about software patents is that they are a total disaster and will continue to be a total disaster until the world's patent offices all take to rejecting patents for things which are glaringly obvious, looking seriously for prior art, and automatically rejecting claims and descriptions which are written so as to obfuscate. That's not going to happen, because to do that job would require far more patent clerks with far greater technical skill and knowledge, and no country could afford to divert that many engineers and scientists from industrial and academic empolyment into patent clerking. So the best course is to abolish the rotten things altogether.

Would you believe that a patent applied for in the 1980s could "protect" the "invention" of something which first appeared as pure mathematics in graph theory decades before, had a highly efficient algorithm for it published in CACM in 1962, and was described in Volume 1 of Knuth's "The Art of Computer Programming" (published in 1968)? If you don't believe that, you don't know anything about how software patents currently work! It happened, and it's the sort of thing that happens all the time.

It seems to have become standard practise to attempt to patent well known stuff, obfuscating it by inventing new names for the components instead of calling them by their well-known names. Sometimes (rarely) a court will notice this and kill a patent, but even in so blatant a case as the "shopping trolley" patent the first court upheld the patent despite having all the evidence and expert testimony and it was an appeal court which reversed that decision, so relying on the courts to repair the incompetence of patent offices is not a good bet.


Tom
Post #1543631
Posted Thursday, February 20, 2014 11:02 AM
SSC-Addicted

SSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-Addicted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 3:10 PM
Points: 409, Visits: 2,401
jay-h (2/20/2014)
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.


The law intends that you do not patent abstract ideas. I imagine that the patent office will probably not be able to stop all instances of dishonest abuse of the system. And we can all probably think of any number of instances of jury trials gone bad that fail to protect us against dishonest actors.

Post #1543640
Posted Monday, February 24, 2014 6:54 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
Patent law has become something we are told about, but not followed.
Post #1544478
Posted Monday, February 24, 2014 10:01 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
The patent law maker should classify the things to be patent and should decide it to carry under suitable law. This initiative will motivate the inventor also.
Post #1544764
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase «««12345

Permissions Expand / Collapse