Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would, from the SEC. There is no analog for lawyers.
You would definitely be disbarred.
The Bar's disciplinary proceedings are not a public process. "Definitely" is definitely too strong.
Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game
171–180 of 285 posts
Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game
#172It was late summer night when I noticed that article on HN. I immediately noticed it's organized like a novel - this popular lame style which often annoys me lately: Matthew Prince knew what was coming. The CEO of Cloudflare, an internet security company and content delivery network in San Francisco, was behind his desk when the emails began to trickle in ... Was he really behind his desk? Hesitated a little before p…
Since you asked ... As both a writer and reader, I fucking hate it. I think it's fucking piss-poor writing by journalists who don't know how to be journalists and don't even know how to write an article, all in the name of attracting simple-minded readers with a one of the lamest prose techniques possible. I'm here to read an article about patents. I'm not interested in the opening few paragraphs of a bad novel. If I wanted to read a bad novel, I'd pick up a bad novel. If these "journalists" want to write a novel, then they should do that and stop writing "journalism" articles.
This is one of the worst scourges of online "journalism" and frankly, I'm tired of having to skip the first few paragraphs of every article because I don't want to read some fucking stupid little story over and over again and want to get to the content. What ever happened to traditional journalism, where the facts are laid out at the top and the details come in later? It seems that "journalism" nowadays can't even get that right. If they want to put a stupid story, at least put it at the end where it belongs, where few or none will read it.
You could say this is a little pet peeve of mine. Thanks for asking.
Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
The patents have no value if the ultimate owners are unable to enforce them. Once the patent exists, it is a tradable asset like copyright.
I'm pretty sure I don't like the idea that patents or copyrights can be transferred. There is the issue in both cases of cooperative invention or writing thought, and I'm not sure how to deal with that.
Even if they weren't tradeable this would still happen. The troll law firms would approach holders and ask to represent them in defending their IP, on a 'no win no fee' basis.
Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
The patents have no value if the ultimate owners are unable to enforce them. Once the patent exists, it is a tradable asset like copyright.
I'm pretty sure I don't like the idea that patents or copyrights can be transferred. There is the issue in both cases of cooperative invention or writing thought, and I'm not sure how to deal with that.
Well, if your dad came up with a great idea, but was getting a little old, wouldn't you want him to be able to pass it to you to see into action?
Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game
#175Something needs to give on this stuff. It's probably going to be hard to get a significant change done, such as getting rid of software patents (following from no patents on Math).
I've wondered if one way to chip away at them, would be to make Patents non-transferable. This would preserve the intent, to protect the inventors R&D costs, but not allow the patents to be exploited by trolls. This would have the effect of devaluing patents themselves, but it's not clear that patents were ever intended to carry direct value rather they exist to grant temporary monopolies for the inventor to earn back the investment.
Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game
#176Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cars was a Pixar movie.
Pixar was already owned by Disney when Cars was released.
Wikipedia[1] says otherwise:
> [Cars was] Pixar's final independently-produced motion picture before its purchase by Disney in May 2006
Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course there are grey areas, and it's appropriate that they're decided by the courts. I'm sure nobody would argue that a lossy copy of a work protected by copyright can still infringe, even if the lossiness was deliberate and intended to differentiate it from the original to a minimal degree. Copyright of literary characters is one of the harder ones to define, and perhaps a system more like patents would be more…
The problem is that algorithms and math are explicitly forbidden from being patented. This is why most software patents include some sort of clause specifying that the work is done using a computer. The patent office has simply done a lousy job when it comes to software patents.
I don't believe you are correct. You can't patent math, but you can patent algorithms. This is analogous to the material world, where you can't patent physics, but you can patent engineering.
An algorithm isn't math, it's a series of instructions. That is something that is patentable, as long as it involves an inventive step.
A more efficient sorting algorithm that is non-obvious would almost certainly be patentable.
Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
Copyright covers implementations, not ideas. I have no moral objection to truly novel inventions in computer science being protected by patents. An innovative search algorithm, a compression scheme, etc. Its shit when MP3s and GIFs were encumbered, but they were genuine inventions whose sharing publicly genuinely advanced the public good. The kind the patent trolls use are not innovative in the same way. We need a st…
Patents cover implementations, not ideas. Ideas are not patentable. Neither are algorithms. The implementation of an idea in a machine is patentable in most places in the world. The implementation of an algorithm on a machine is patentable in the U.S. We need better understanding of existing definitions so that we don't rehash the same arguments over and over again.
I disagree with your characterization. Physical processes, expressed as "first x, then y, then z" are clearly and indisputably patentable. They can just be a series of steps performed by hand, no machine required. What is this but an algorithm?
And, for anyone who believes that algorithms can't be patented, I have a collection of GIF's and MP3's to sell you.
Re: Cloudflare’s fight with a “patent troll” could alter the game
#180I've used Latham & Watkins. Just made a call to let a partner there know what I think about his firm's alumna and how it colors my opinion of him and his firm. Encourage everyone to check with your firm's General Counsel about this. If you use Latham, or Kirkland or Weil, encourage your GC to reach out and make your views heard. It's despicable that these lawyers are harassing their firms' former and potential client…
Disagree! Both ethics and the law make it clear that the (negative) actions of former employees have no bearing on the institution.
For instance, yelling at the average american for Donald Trump colluding with Russia is both pointless, and detrimental to the average person.