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

Patent Troll: Anyone Using WiFi Infringes; Won't Sue Individuals 'At This Stage'

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 97 posts

Re: Patent Troll: Anyone Using WiFi Infringes; Won't Sue Individuals 'At This Stage'

#71

Post by radu_floricica »

PakG1 wrote: post #68
burgerbrain wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm currently finding myself question my own disapproval of capital punishment. Every single one of the board members of this company could be put to an incredibly painful death by lethal injection and I just might bake a cake.

You know that death by lethal injection is actually not painful? Not that I support your hyperbole (if it is hyperbole), just clarifying the facts.

Occasionally it is. I remember there have been instances where the sedative in the cocktail didn't work, but the paralyzing and killing agent did. Wasn't obvious from the outside, but it must have been a pretty awful death...

Re: Patent Troll: Anyone Using WiFi Infringes; Won't Sue Individuals 'At This Stage'

#72

Post by radu_floricica »

waterhouse wrote: post #38

The book "Against Intellectual Monopoly" is highly recommended reading for the question of patents (and other intellectual property). The authors make a mostly empirical survey of the effects of intellectual property laws and of their absence in a wide range of industries, and conclude that their effect is a stifling rather than an encouragement of innovation. I think it's especially appropriate because, while my own…

I've read that the possibility to patent genes led to the explosion of the field some years back. Are there such positive examples discussed in the book?

Re: Patent Troll: Anyone Using WiFi Infringes; Won't Sue Individuals 'At This Stage'

#73

Post by whatusername »

pyrotechnick wrote: post #45

It's about time the CSIRO ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_Scientific_and_Ind... ) got some money for their invention.

I have seen a few US writers attempt to call CSIRO a patent troll. Somewhat amusing. This article isn't talking about the CSIRO patent though.

Re: Patent Troll: Anyone Using WiFi Infringes; Won't Sue Individuals 'At This Stage'

#75

Post by caf »

machrider wrote: post #35
crizCraig wrote: post #25

The patent is from 2004. http://www.google.com/patents?id=zi8SAAAAEBAJ&printsec=a... I hope their greed gets the best of them. Here's a poll I created to get general feedback on this subject. It's so infuriating to me, but a lot of people seem to be indifferent on the subject of patents: http://www.wepolls.com/p/3363896/

If they applied for the patent in 2001, how can they possibly sue users of wifi? 802.11 has been around longer than that.

It's possible that the patent(s) are only alleged to apply to 802.11g and/or 802.11n implementations. At least one of the patents appears to relate to MIMO, which would apply only to 802.11n.

Re: Patent Troll: Anyone Using WiFi Infringes; Won't Sue Individuals 'At This Stage'

#76

Post by danssig »

Bud wrote: post #28

Leeches. Someone should destroy these folks. Legally and peacefully, of course. But they must be destroyed.

It would probably be more effective and work faster if victims of this nonsense just started showing up at these people's houses with ski masks and baseball bats.

Re: Patent Troll: Anyone Using WiFi Infringes; Won't Sue Individuals 'At This Stage'

#77

Post by danssig »

MartinCron wrote: post #59
Astrohacker wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Government isn't effective, democratic or otherwise. But I'm not a cynic. I have high hopes for humanity, long term. The sooner we get rid of the institutionalized use of force (government) the better.

I don't normally press people for alternatives, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If we were to get rid of "institutionalized use of force", what would we replace it with? Can you give me a single example of a large-scale society without effective government that hasn't devolved into a nightmare scenario?

>Can you give me a single example of a large-scale society without effective government that hasn't devolved into a nightmare scenario?

Of course not. Any time it has been tried (e.g. Spain, some of those under Lenin), other governments have recognized the danger and responded immediately to destroy the movement before it can take off.

Re: Patent Troll: Anyone Using WiFi Infringes; Won't Sue Individuals 'At This Stage'

#78

Post by danssig »

caf wrote: post #60
tjr wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should be suing the manufacturers in the first place. Even if we were to assume for a moment that this patent has any validity whatsoever, it would not be the users of the wireless router than owe them a royalty payment, but the router manufacturers. And I seriously doubt that a fair royalty on a single router (such as what you might find in one of these small coffeeshops that they are suing) is in the thousands…

Why? It's not just the implementation of a patented idea that's protected; it's also the use.

Don't consumers have some protection here? I mean, they probably bought the wifi at a common store. You don't normally walk out of Walmart with a box containing a product you expect to not legally be able to use.

Re: Patent Troll: Anyone Using WiFi Infringes; Won't Sue Individuals 'At This Stage'

#79

Post by caf »

danssig wrote: post #78
caf wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? It's not just the implementation of a patented idea that's protected; it's also the use.

Don't consumers have some protection here? I mean, they probably bought the wifi at a common store. You don't normally walk out of Walmart with a box containing a product you expect to not legally be able to use.

Legally I believe that's an issue between the consumer and the merchant and/or manufacturer.

Re: Patent Troll: Anyone Using WiFi Infringes; Won't Sue Individuals 'At This Stage'

#80

Post by knorby »

PakG1 wrote: post #68
burgerbrain wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm currently finding myself question my own disapproval of capital punishment. Every single one of the board members of this company could be put to an incredibly painful death by lethal injection and I just might bake a cake.

You know that death by lethal injection is actually not painful? Not that I support your hyperbole (if it is hyperbole), just clarifying the facts.

It is meant to be a bit painful in all circumstances. It isn't a pleasant way to die, but it doesn't look all that bad to watch, which is why it is used. Pain and trauma free measures like nitrogen asphyxiation aren't used for that reason; pro-death penalty advocates want to keep it painful.
Post reply on HN