Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

blog.runwayfinder.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–89 of 89 posts

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#81

Post by Groxx »

flipbrad wrote: post #73
Natsu wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know that they want to change that, too, but I really hope they don't. Otherwise, the people who didn't think a thing was even worth patenting (or who couldn't afford to patent it) will have their inventions stolen from them. I will justify the use of "stolen" here by saying it's because they're no longer legally able to use their own idea. Restricting an idea via IP laws is one of the few ways an idea can actually…

i'm not sure that's true, necessarily. IANAL (yet), but unless I'm mistaken, a patent still has to be novel. So if they had publicly disclosed what they thought had no value... they could invalidate any later patent that tried to make it illegal for them to use their idea. As for the obvious comeback - no, you shouldn't not make public something which you think has no value. Either patent it or stick it out there to…

>... a patent still has to be novel.

In theory. Not necessarily in practice.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#83

Post by kragen »

tif wrote: post #77
kragen wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The classic case of a license in common law is permission to enter someone's property. Consider this case: Me, opening the door to my apartment: Oh shit! There's a burglar in my living room! Burglar: I'm not a burglar! This is my apartment! I've owned it for ten years. Me: This isn't your apartment! It's my apartment! I bought it from Hugo López last year! Burglar: Hold on a second. As long as you don't lay your…

But if RunwayFinder intends to attack the validity of the patent by claiming obviousness or something similar, I see the analogy as more like: me: This was no-one's apartment when I got here. There are thousands like it, in fact an infinite supply. Get your own. burglar: Well, we'll work that out in court. In fact I own all of them. me: No, it was public land and I just built my apartment here. burglar: Well, how abo…

If you have to sign something, it's probably a contract, not a license. It might turn out to be an invalid contract if you're already entitled to what the burglar offers you.

Analogies to real property are problematic because of the excludable and rival nature of real property.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#84

Post by raymondh »

Empedocles99 wrote: post #59

Premise: a) Many (most?) small software outfits, and software developers don't agree that software should be patentable. b) Some of us would be willing to pay an insurance premium against patent trolls Proposal: Form an organization (or convince an existing one like the EFF) funded (donations, I'd presume) by all of us to: a) Lobby for changes to to the patent process and law. b) Aggressively challenge obvious softwa…

If the SAP/Oracle case is any guide, then even having a well-funded defense won't save you from massive losses.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#85

Post by Natsu »

flipbrad wrote: post #73
Natsu wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know that they want to change that, too, but I really hope they don't. Otherwise, the people who didn't think a thing was even worth patenting (or who couldn't afford to patent it) will have their inventions stolen from them. I will justify the use of "stolen" here by saying it's because they're no longer legally able to use their own idea. Restricting an idea via IP laws is one of the few ways an idea can actually…

i'm not sure that's true, necessarily. IANAL (yet), but unless I'm mistaken, a patent still has to be novel. So if they had publicly disclosed what they thought had no value... they could invalidate any later patent that tried to make it illegal for them to use their idea. As for the obvious comeback - no, you shouldn't not make public something which you think has no value. Either patent it or stick it out there to…

Well, what I've seen has been different: in the JMRI case, they patented the guy's idea and then sued him to stop using it (while infringing upon their copyrights, if memory serves).

Frankly, I wish that independent reinvention were at least weighed against novelty, but I haven't seen that work out in practice very often. Instead, they race to connect the dots once someone makes a new kind of dot available, even though everyone skilled in the art could probably could snap things together like Lego (TM) brand building blocks.

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#86

Post by aces »

There was an article on here recently about how in general the more agressive the lawyer is, the less case they have. Potentially the lawyer is bluffing. It a tragedy, that you have to shut down. This sort of thing makes me wonder if there is a market for a decentralized webserver. Sort of a bittorrent but for web pages that would allow you to get around some of the patent claims--in a way. The profit value of this would be that as traffic increased on site the added users would handle some of the load. Essentially auto scaling without the added hardware costs. Potential issues to get over is how to get the browsers to support such a thing. Could websockets or even existing JSONP work through it?

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#87

Post by dansingerman »

sdizdar wrote: post #32

I believe that FlightPrep has a valid business plan. They have patent in order to prevent commoditization (i.e., giving away things for free) of their market. So they sue all free providers and if there is somebody with real money (like Jeppesen) they understand they cannot go after them. I think this something each copmany should do when entering a niche market which can be easily commoditized.

If you are in a market that can easily be commoditized, you need to innovate and provide extra value, not use legal loopholes to stifle innovation and competition.

The World would be a far worse place if [insert any commodity here] was patented and the owner of the patent could sell at a price of their choosing (and licence at a price of their choosing)

Re: Software Patents Shut Down RunwayFinder

#88

Post by cookiecaper »

kragen wrote: post #76
cookiecaper wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you a lawyer? Because it doesn't sound like the same standards would apply in your example and in a case of patent litigation.

I am not. Are you? Why do you think different standards would apply?

I'm not a lawyer either.

I think different standards apply because there's a rather significant difference in the urgency between a dispute about an intruder in one's living quarters and a patent or intellectual property lawsuit. It looks like RunwayFinder is not even trying to dispute the case and is giving up pre-emptively because they don't have the funds to fight the case.

Accepting a temporary license to postpone the lawsuit does not sound smart to me, it sounds like a ploy to allow RunwayFinder to stay online longer while FlightPrep continues to pursue licensing agreements (which the owner has no ability to pay) or legal allegations that will result in additional damages as well as an admission of the validity of the patent. But I guess now we'll just have to wait for someone who knows what they're talking about to correct one or both of us. :)

Post reply on HN