Live data from Hacker News

Patent troll claims ownership of interactive Web—and might win

arstechnica.com

51–60 of 68 posts

Re: Patent troll claims ownership of interactive Web—and might win

#51

As long as they target other software patent trolls like Microsoft and Apple I'd be perfectly fine with it. They could become the batman of the patent world.

No, I do not find it acceptable for anyone to have a dagger at my throat, whether I trust them to use it or not.

Re: Patent troll claims ownership of interactive Web—and might win

#52
post #37

I just love this. Lots of dick-swinging and heart-bleeding and whining and greed. There is no right side in this. Everyone just wants their way. The web is not some inalienable right handed down from God for the betterment of humanity. It's a clever idea that lots of people find handy. Kleenex and eyeglasses are clever, too. I don't see a movement to free tissue paper. Why is anyone shocked by the prospect that it ma…

Why should I buy into the sad delusion that everything has a pricetag? Ideas are free until someone wants to make a buck off of them.

Re: Patent troll claims ownership of interactive Web—and might win

#53
post #15

The real issue here is the hegemony that gives a single coalition governments the ability dictate worldwide patent and copyright law. It seems that if that didn't exist, people interested in innovating and creating great, new, things would just go to the countries that didn't have forcefully draconian IP laws. Sure, maybe there are some advantages to having patents, but in their current form for software, they are a…

> In my opinion, patent 'trolling' is a good thing, (as long as it doesn't happen to me). Why? because the harder they troll, the more obviously broken the system will be, and the more likely it is to get fixed.

Unfortunately this is not realistic. A major problem of the current patents system is the amount of money invested ("zillions" of dollars); every step towards reforming it is essentially equivalent to burning (some) people's dollars in flames - there may be a good reason behind, but it's very unlikely to happen.

Re: Patent troll claims ownership of interactive Web—and might win

#54
post #46
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possibly, but you'd have to be making some real money for the trolls to bother targeting you.

MAFIAA doesn't wait for you to make some real money before targeting you. Greediness is a bottomless pit.

True, but that's copyright IP not patent IP.

Re: Patent troll claims ownership of interactive Web—and might win

#55
post #15

The real issue here is the hegemony that gives a single coalition governments the ability dictate worldwide patent and copyright law. It seems that if that didn't exist, people interested in innovating and creating great, new, things would just go to the countries that didn't have forcefully draconian IP laws. Sure, maybe there are some advantages to having patents, but in their current form for software, they are a…

In politics/activism, this is usually referred to as "heightening the contradictions". That strategy only works, however, if you have a fairly optimistic view of history and progress. If you don't, the strategy is just as likely to produce a dramatically worse outcome.

Re: Patent troll claims ownership of interactive Web—and might win

#57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're talking about the web the year Mosaic was released. Before 1993 there were no web browsers that ran in Windows. There were no web search engines yet. There was little more than static hypertext webpages for research labs. There may well not have been other client-server applications yet... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_World_Wide_Web

Gopher and Archie and some remote identity/finger protocols already did most of the things the interactive web does today long before Mosaic showed up. There have been many beautiful advances since then in usability, bandwidth, user base, and especially integration with outside services. None of those things constitute inventions in the sense of being technological, novel, and non-obvious. Which doesn't stop absolute…

A competent patent office would not be sufficient to evaluate software patents. The volume is just too great. Imagine trying to evaluate mechanical engineering patents if millions of people carried machine shops around in their backpacks.

Re: Patent troll claims ownership of interactive Web—and might win

#58
post #30
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you wish to do business in the USA, you cannot ignore US patent law. Therefore moving out of the US is a hardship for you with absolutely no potential upside.

Fortunately for many people, the US is not the only country. Millions of companies survive and thrive without doing business in the US. At this time in history, we are used to thinking of the US as being a favorable business climate; relatively free of corruption with clear rules and low cost of business formation. It is clear that unless current trends are reversed that this will not remain the case. If the governme…

Automatic licensing sounds like a very interesting way to balance IP creator interests with IP consumer interests.

Extend the same principle to copyright: Hollywood can't refuse to sell me a movie just because I don't live in a certain geographical area, and RIAA can't deny YouTube users the right to cover and remix their music as long as a reasonable fee is collected by some other means, whether privately or via a public distribution scheme.

Perhaps the law should define a nominal amount per work that relieves the payer of all IP-related liability. The amount could depend on the type of work, and/or proportional to the profit generated, so that hobbyists who only copy stuff for personal use pay at the lowest bracket and people who make a lot of money out of other people's IP pay more, just like taxes.

Are there any obvious downsides to the idea?

Re: Patent troll claims ownership of interactive Web—and might win

#59
post #15

The real issue here is the hegemony that gives a single coalition governments the ability dictate worldwide patent and copyright law. It seems that if that didn't exist, people interested in innovating and creating great, new, things would just go to the countries that didn't have forcefully draconian IP laws. Sure, maybe there are some advantages to having patents, but in their current form for software, they are a…

In politics/activism, this is usually referred to as "heightening the contradictions". That strategy only works, however, if you have a fairly optimistic view of history and progress. If you don't, the strategy is just as likely to produce a dramatically worse outcome.

I was going to ask the GP, I'll ask you instead, can you think of concrete historical cases where pointing out a ton of problems led to a dramatic reform instead of just slight tweaking that ends up introducing more problems? Can you think of cases where (bad) --causes alone--> (worse) --causes alone--> (incredibly better)? (It seems to me it's more of an ebb and flow of good/bad.) The sentiment seems especially popular among nerds for some reason. To both charitably and caricaturely quote: "I hope SOPA passes; then everyone will use Freenet!" "I hope Facebook severely violates its users' trust, then people will care about privacy." "I hope someone blows up a security line at an airport, then we'll get rid of security theater." "I hope we have patent Armageddon, it will hasten the destruction of IP."

Re: Patent troll claims ownership of interactive Web—and might win

#60
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In politics/activism, this is usually referred to as "heightening the contradictions". That strategy only works, however, if you have a fairly optimistic view of history and progress. If you don't, the strategy is just as likely to produce a dramatically worse outcome.

I was going to ask the GP, I'll ask you instead, can you think of concrete historical cases where pointing out a ton of problems led to a dramatic reform instead of just slight tweaking that ends up introducing more problems? Can you think of cases where (bad) --causes alone--> (worse) --causes alone--> (incredibly better)? (It seems to me it's more of an ebb and flow of good/bad.) The sentiment seems especially popu…

Sure, drawing from recent history in the US I'd say that 1986 tax reforms[1] the 1996 welfare reforms[2]. I don't think that they happen often enough that they should be relied on, though, and I'd say that they're pretty much impossible in the current US political climate. On the other hand, countries that aren't the US might have better luck, since most are smaller and more homogeneous, and have parliamentary systems with less veto points. But then again, smaller countries are by their very nature less able to take on the rest of the world in the resulting trade disputes, and the EU countries I believe have the EU itself dictating aspects of patent law.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Reform_Act_of_1986 Sometimes called "The Second Reagan tax cut", but it ended up raising overall revenue so that's something of a misnomer. It eliminated a lot of loopholes and lowered the base rates. [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Responsibility_and_Wor...

Post reply on HN