reminds me of the crap Blackboard pull so they don't have to compete on merit
When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site
11–20 of 39 posts
Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site
#12Why is nobody talking about the real issue here: the slashed budget of the USPTO that has made them unable to properly vet patent applications for a decade? The problem isn't the trolls, it's the fact that these bullshit patent requests are being granted in the first place. The USPTO can't afford to have experts review patent applications, and this is the result.
I'd argue that: 1.) There are bad feedback loops between speed / quality / price of patent examination and the amount of ridiculous patents issued. 2.) Increasing the budget to improve screening and throughput will lead to an increase in patents submitted - will this increase at a higher / lower rate than their budget? I.e. will new patent submissions bloat the office even more than now? 3.) We could try to increase…
I think you really need to re-examine 1 & 2. Increasing the speed and quality of patent review may lead to more patent applications, but would reduce the number of baseless patents granted. As for price, the USPTO was never supposed to be self-sufficient. Doing it properly means the taxpayer picks up the tab. That's just something you have to accept in exchange for living in a highly developed economy.
IBM's patents, as well as those of Google and others, are generally defensive. They're meant to provide ammo to protect themselves from patent trolls.
Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
By someone who knows what they're doing, sure. Consider, however, the patent for Linked List that was granted: Any programmer would have balked at it, but the unspecialized clerk reviewing it wouldn't have had a clue.
I'd argue: The ability for one man to know what "real innovation", is always <, the ability of a team with every incentive of faking them out to overcome.
Yes.
But you can not crowd-review a patent, since it sometimes gives hints about whole business models, and getting others to know your inventions is dangerous (small differences are easily defensible in patent claims). Therefore you can not have (> reviewing applying).
Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
By someone who knows what they're doing, sure. Consider, however, the patent for Linked List that was granted: Any programmer would have balked at it, but the unspecialized clerk reviewing it wouldn't have had a clue.
Whoa Linked Lists got patented?!?! That's crazy. Do you happen to have a link about it, I'm really curious about this. That's friggin crazy...
Yeah, it's pretty damned discouraging.
Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site
#15On a related note, the guys from Hipmunk[0] also patented something ridiculous which is basically a simple jquery plugin.
Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site
#16Why is nobody talking about the real issue here: the slashed budget of the USPTO that has made them unable to properly vet patent applications for a decade? The problem isn't the trolls, it's the fact that these bullshit patent requests are being granted in the first place. The USPTO can't afford to have experts review patent applications, and this is the result.
I don't think the causal relationship between budget cuts and bad patents is so clear. If the Patent Office weren't so promiscuous to begin with, the inability to properly vet applications could very well lead to fewer patents being granted.
Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site
#17Another piece of evidence that software patents are harmful.
Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site
#18On a related note, the guys from Hipmunk[0] also patented something ridiculous which is basically a simple jquery plugin. [0]: http://www.hipmunk.com/
Getting a patent for something isn't necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. Doing harm with those patents is. Many companies get patents to protect themselves from situations just like this one.
Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd argue that: 1.) There are bad feedback loops between speed / quality / price of patent examination and the amount of ridiculous patents issued. 2.) Increasing the budget to improve screening and throughput will lead to an increase in patents submitted - will this increase at a higher / lower rate than their budget? I.e. will new patent submissions bloat the office even more than now? 3.) We could try to increase…
I think you really need to re-examine 1 & 2. Increasing the speed and quality of patent review may lead to more patent applications, but would reduce the number of baseless patents granted. As for price, the USPTO was never supposed to be self-sufficient. Doing it properly means the taxpayer picks up the tab. That's just something you have to accept in exchange for living in a highly developed economy. IBM's patents,…
It would reduce the ratio of bad/good patents - not number, this is my argument: increasing ease of submitting (speed, etc.) will probably lead to more patent submissions - the relation of these curves says whether the number would decrease.
I wasn't arguing for pricing it at true cost - I'm saying that if you're subsidizing an activity and increasing throughput - you tend to get doubly more of it.
Defensive patents also restrict innovation - see: "patent thickets". Having IBM patent worthless things is just as bad - probably worse than smaller ones because of their credible threat.
Re: When Bad Patents Hurt Good People: Patent Threat Shuts Down Flight Planning Site
#20Why is nobody talking about the real issue here: the slashed budget of the USPTO that has made them unable to properly vet patent applications for a decade? The problem isn't the trolls, it's the fact that these bullshit patent requests are being granted in the first place. The USPTO can't afford to have experts review patent applications, and this is the result.
I'd argue that: 1.) There are bad feedback loops between speed / quality / price of patent examination and the amount of ridiculous patents issued. 2.) Increasing the budget to improve screening and throughput will lead to an increase in patents submitted - will this increase at a higher / lower rate than their budget? I.e. will new patent submissions bloat the office even more than now? 3.) We could try to increase…
Surely eliminating troll patents would reduce the burden on the system, not the other way around.