Twitter Gets Sued For Letting Famous People Interact Online

Post by jrockway » Thu, Jan 20, 2011, 11:03 PM UTC

pavel_lishin wrote: post #41

ZeroMinx wrote: post #2

How many of these examples do we need to see before something is done with the US patent system?

What incentive is there for someone in the U.S. government to change the patent system?

Post by krakensden » Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 2:14 AM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #51

pavel_lishin wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What incentive is there for someone in the U.S. government to change the patent system?

What incentive is there for someone on the Supreme Court not to interpret the Constitution as saying, "Supreme Court Justices can randomly take everyone's money for no reason"? Integrity. I know we talk about the 24 hour spin cycle and how all politicians are just mouthpieces for the MPAA, but some of them probably take a few minutes out of their term to think about how to make the world a better place. A few of them…

Post by nitrogen » Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 8:48 AM UTC

snorkel wrote: post #34

macov wrote: post #25

The problem with the patent system is that you can patent things that do not exist. Is it ridiculous?

Agreed. A more sane patent system would require a working demonstration, and further require that the demonstration must be performed each time the patent holder claims infringement. Any idea that can not be readily demonstrated in a practical sense should not be patentable. No demo, no patent.

Post by hessenwolf » Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 10:01 AM UTC

brlewis wrote: post #10

ZeroMinx wrote: post #2

How many of these examples do we need to see before something is done with the US patent system?

What we need is a compilation of examples where a software patent hindered or threatened to hinder innovation.

Post by cookiecaper » Sat, Jan 22, 2011, 11:03 PM UTC