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

When Patents Attack

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 135 posts

Re: When Patents Attack

#51

Post by smashing »

monochromatic wrote: post #9
almightygod wrote: post #3

I get anxious every time I read another patent troll story wondering when my weekend creations will end up costing me $ when they accidentally infringe on a patent because I roll out some seemingly ubiquitous feature. I'm deeply saddened by this mess and doubt it will ever be resolved. There is far to much money at stake now to revert things - money = lobbying.

If it's any consolation, hearing from a patent troll means you've built a successful product.

Except you don't need to make a profit to be subject to a lawsuit. Hobby or weekend projects are just as liable.

Re: When Patents Attack

#53

Post by barkingcat »

collint wrote: post #35
pkulak wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That entire article rests on the assumption that software patents have some value outside of the ability to sue someone else with them or to ward of lawsuits by someone else. They want you to think of a software patent like it's a piece of music or a motion picture. They're just like Netflix or Spotify for patents! I don't know how anyone working for that company can sleep at night.

On a very expensive and comfortable bed.

and lots of pillows!

Re: When Patents Attack

#54

Post by preinheimer »

kenjackson wrote: post #13
preinheimer wrote: post #6

As a co-founder of a startup, my most worrying thoughts are not finding customers or improving the product. They're "when will I get a scary legal letter that asks for millions over a patent I've never heard of".

Really? I never ever think about patents. Ever (except when reading HN). It's just not a real day to day issue.

I guess the reason I find them more worrying is the lack of control. I know I can write good software, I think I've got a great product idea, and I know where I can get help in the areas I lack. These are all issues I can manage. Bruce Schneier writes a lot about how people fear things that are new, and things that are outside their control, this seems to apply.

The only way for me to "manage" some sort of patent lawsuit would be buying insurance against it (is that even possible?), and even then the insurance company would likely settle, handing over more cash, and further validating the business model.

Re: When Patents Attack

#55

Post by kogus »

adorton wrote: post #48

One of the best TAL episodes in recent memory. The story mentions that modern patents (specifically software patents) lack the novelty that the patent system was originally designed to encourage. Did patent laws change at some point in history to allow this to happen?

The audio version of the story mentions that it was a decision by the patent office, not specific legislation. Sometime in the 1980s they went from copyrighting software (i.e., treating it like literature or art) to patenting it.

Re: When Patents Attack

#56

Post by monochromatic »

smashing wrote: post #51
monochromatic wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's any consolation, hearing from a patent troll means you've built a successful product.

Except you don't need to make a profit to be subject to a lawsuit. Hobby or weekend projects are just as liable.

Well sure. But from a practical standpoint, a patent troll is far less likely to bother with someone who doesn't have reasonably deep pockets.

Re: When Patents Attack

#58

Post by dstein »

As the article only touched on, this is precisely why the next computing giant will not come from Silicon Valley or anywhere in the US. The current software patent situation has ensured it.

Re: When Patents Attack

#59

Post by dolphenstein »

pkulak wrote: post #26
lukejduncan wrote: post #18

Intellectual Ventures recently posted a rebuttal http://intven.com/newsroom/insights/11-07-25/Disruption_Invi... They like to say things like "ideas have value" and that they are "disruptive." Are there examples where the patents they own and monetize actually represent valuable "ideas" and not after the fact claims of invention? I'm guessing not, but open to being proven wrong. And who, or what, do they think they a…

That entire article rests on the assumption that software patents have some value outside of the ability to sue someone else with them or to ward of lawsuits by someone else. They want you to think of a software patent like it's a piece of music or a motion picture. They're just like Netflix or Spotify for patents! I don't know how anyone working for that company can sleep at night.

In movies you can't have a patent for action cop movies with a surprise plot twist. That would be absurd. Just like generic software patents.

Re: When Patents Attack

#60

Post by cageface »

dangrover wrote: post #34

What if you could pay for some kind of insurance product to protect against patent lawsuits? Or perhaps some kind of co-operative that owned a bunch of bullshit patents to be used for defensive purposes in such a scenario?

You can. rpxcorp.com
Post reply on HN