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

Enough Is Enough

avc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 193 posts

Re: Enough Is Enough

#111

Post by dpcan »

jasonkester wrote: post #30

Maybe somebody needs to move this issue to someplace more visible. I'd like to introduce the concept of Movie Patents. I'd register a patent for the plot device of having the bad guy be the main character's best friend, with additional clauses for being his boss, advisor, or partner. I wouldn't ever make any movies. I'd just sit back and collect royalties from everybody who used my idea. The reason behind this is tha…

You have a great idea/point.

The problem is that as soon as you put the word "software" in front of the word "patent" during a discussion you can actually see eyes glaze over and brains shut off in the person you are talking to.

It's just easier for representatives to ignore this. That or they see the issue as niche, and therefore don't pay attention.

Yes, the same ridiculous rules that apply to software MUST apply to something more mainstream so that it gets noticed.

Re: Enough Is Enough

#112

Post by rubinelli »

arethuza wrote: post #102
mluiten wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Additionally, to own copyright, you would actually have to _create_ a product/movie/etc. How any patent holder can sue without actually creating or using their own patent is beyond me.

What makes you think ownership of copyright isn't transferable?

I think the point mluiten is making is that you have to actually create the content (or pay someone to create it) to have copyright, whereas you don't have to implement anything to have a patent granted. Since content creation is much more expensive than content distribution, there would be no economic incentives for "copyright trolls."

Re: Enough Is Enough

#113

Post by dpcan »

tedjdziuba wrote: post #71

Alright, Fred. We all agree with you here, the people you need to convince are the ones writing the laws. You're a wealthy and powerful person, who is good friends with other wealthy and powerful people, so why not leverage that? Hire a lobbying firm, get actively involved in the cause. Whatever you do, don't count on Reddit and Hacker News to do it for you, that's just slacktivism.

Exactly. We all sit around here and preach to the choir.

I don't know that anyone really knows how or what to do here. How does a non-mainstream issue like this get into the public eye in such a way that anyone but our niche gives a crap?

Lastly, we have to ask why they REALLY exist. What is REALLY going on. Where is the money in all this, who's making the most?

If Big Software Corp A wants patents to stick around, and the legislator wants Big Software Corp A's money for the next election, do they have any interest in representing the people, or just the corporation?

In this situation, the number of PEOPLE who don't want these patents has to surpass the influence of the large corporations who do want software patents to stay as they are. I just don't see this happening.

Re: Enough Is Enough

#114

Post by huherto »

jasonkester wrote: post #30

Maybe somebody needs to move this issue to someplace more visible. I'd like to introduce the concept of Movie Patents. I'd register a patent for the plot device of having the bad guy be the main character's best friend, with additional clauses for being his boss, advisor, or partner. I wouldn't ever make any movies. I'd just sit back and collect royalties from everybody who used my idea. The reason behind this is tha…

That is actually a very insightful way to look at it. Furthermore, You can have the same story, but the value of the movie is not in the plot itself. The value is on how well it is executed. Acting, dialogs, photography, special effects, etc.

Re: Enough Is Enough

#115

Post by ams6110 »

DrJokepu wrote: post #63
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think your company deserves to be protected against others independently developing a similar algorithm?

Your question assumes two things that I haven't said, implied and are simply untrue. I'm not sure if that's due to a misunderstanding on your part or a lack of clarity on my part. First, it assumes that we want to be protected against "others independently developing a similar algorithm". Second, it assumes that I "believe that my company deserves to be protected" from such other people. We're not concerned about oth…

We're not concerned about other people independently developing a similar algorithm as it's rather non-trivial and as I mentioned, it took an awful lot of effort to develop it. We're much more concerned about the very real problem that people (e.g. competitors) will use our research and work.

Then what you do is keep your algorithm as a trade secret. The point of a patent is to publicize the invention so that others may benefit, and in compensation to the inventor they get a period of protection on its use so that they may license the invention and recoup R&D costs.

Re: Enough Is Enough

#116

Post by imtyler »

unfasten wrote: post #55
imtyler wrote: post #38

I think America's patent & copyright laws are in need of a serious rethinking in the digital age, but what are we the people doing about it? I would love to get involved (or donate) but I'm not aware of any credible groups or projects making strides to help bring about such a change. Any noteworthy efforts out there that I should know about?

The Electronic Frontier Foundation ( http://www.eff.org/issues/patents ) is working at it. They're starting off with getting the most ridiculous patents reexamined by the patent office in their Patent Busting project http://w2.eff.org/patent/ . They've succeeded in having a number of patents reexamined and some narrowed or invalidated. They also lobby for patent reform. They're exactly the credible group you're looki…

Thank you! I'll be looking into these organizations, I just signed up for the EFF newsletter. I appreciate the response.

Re: Enough Is Enough

#117

Post by orijing »

> I can't understand why our goverment allows this shit to go on.

It's because Congress has been embroiled in a bitter fight of brinkmanship over who can stall longer over raising the debt limit over the past year. Not much actual progress has come out since they decided that they will keep up the debt limit talks, knowing completely that the partisanship will yield no progress.

While they have debated raising the debt limit, the debt has risen by over half a trillion dollars. They need to fix that and move onto other things. The point of Congress isn't to debate solely over how to balance the budget. They have other responsibilities too, and they need to get to it.

Re: Enough Is Enough

#118

Post by generators »

patent should include AMOUNT OF INNOVATIVENESS. AND RESTRICT THE REWARD INVENTOR CAN ASK FOR IT. ( IN TERMS OF TIME, FOR SOFTWARE PATENTS, TIME OF PATENTS SHOULD BE REDUCE HEAVILY, IN TERMS OF MONEY, IN TERMS OF NUMBER OF REPLICATION ETC, IN TERMS OF NEGOTIABLE AND UN NEGOTIABLE REWRADS ) . think about this. <-- THIS WILL REQUIRED MORE EFFORTS. but overall , it will ease the pain on both side later. ( in terms of cost of lawsuits and discovery of patent infringement cost )

Re: Enough Is Enough

#119

Post by huherto »

Other than patent trolls. Who is supporting software patents?

I understand that big software companies. (IBM, Oracle, Apple, etc) own a large portfolios of patents that they can use to defend themselves. But, do they really support software patents or they just use them to play the games they have to play?

Re: Enough Is Enough

#120

Post by tttp »

I hope that avc, ycombinator, Andreessen Horowitz and a lot of known VC and business angels introduce a new simple rule on their agreement:

To get funded, a company must not try to obtain software patent, and if they do have software patent(s), they will publicly say they will not try to license them and will not sue for infringement of one of their patent.

Beside clearing up the landscape, it will send a clear message, hopefully that is going to be heard by politicians and media: software patent doesn't help innovation, quite the opposite, the guys that fund innovation refuse to give money to companies (ab)using software patent.

Moreover, as VCs seem to be able to work on templates for the paperwork to lower the cost of the creation and founding of a start-up, couldn't they work on standard responses to lower the cost of defending against a patent troll as well ?

Post reply on HN