71–80 of 193 posts
Is there any push right now to enact legislation that makes patent litigation available only to entities that actively participate in the relevant marketplaces? It doesn't seem like there is, but maybe I'm not that informed in these affairs.
No. Just stop granting patents on software or business processes. Copyright, yes, patents, no.
> Even though there was no evidence of copying—Vringo admitted as much What a ridiculous system we all operate under. You come up with a mathematical formula for ranking some text on a page (in this case, what ads to show first), and you could now owe $250M/year to some company you've never heard of because they already bought the rights to that formula. It turns my stomach; sorry that I have nothing of more substanc…
They(and you), did hear of the company that originally got these patents. Here's the very interesting story behind the patents. http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/31/why-google-might-be-going-t... edit: I am rate limited from replying to fpgeeks reply below so I will post my reply here. First, the author is extremely clear that he invested in Vringo, in fact the whole article is about why he did so., so I am not sure why…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because the same thing can be invented independently doesn't mean the system is ridiculous. In fact, it's the very fact that the system relies on to create research competition. Being the Vringo is the motivation to invent things before the competition does.
You seemed to have missed the part where Vringo bought the patents from Lycos, a company google killed on the open market by, in your terms, doing better research.
Is there any push right now to enact legislation that makes patent litigation available only to entities that actively participate in the relevant marketplaces? It doesn't seem like there is, but maybe I'm not that informed in these affairs.
That seems like a pretty unfair approach -- if it's valid to have a patent, seems like you shouldn't penalize someone who doesn't have the resources to "actively participate" in the market by preventing them from licensing or selling it to others. I personally don't care for patents, but even more unfair than what we have would be letting some, but not all, actors get and enforce these patents.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is clearly America's downfall -- and America is pulling the world with itself.
Oh come now. Patent trolls are a massive nuisance, but they don't represent an existential threat to this country - let alone all of human civilization.
But think about it - what exactly does American produce these days?
Yes, they still have a heavy manufacturing base - but that's declining and fast.
If you stifle innovation, you've basically shot yourself in the foot.
FUCK PATENTS. The old system (copyright, IP, etc) needs to BURN TO THE GROUND.
Let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Fuck software patents... Absolutely. Copyright... Not so much. That is actually useful. Open source and free software would not work without copyright law. Copyright only triggers when you copy somebody else's work, I.e. a specific expression of an idea. Patents trigger when you merely happen to have the same idea.
Not true at all. Copyleft licenses as currently written wouldn't work without copyright law; all-permissive licenses like MIT and BSD would become the default state. I'll happily take that trade, and several folks at the FSF and other FOSS organizations are on record saying the same.
This sort of 'litle parent that could' story are the post child for pro patent folk.
No, that's not how it works. No, small one-time inventors to not benefit from the current parent system. Irritating as anything seeing it being played out this way.
This is a commercial patent trolling company, from the inception it was so, and it remains so now. These are the people who the current patent system benefits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also not even designed to hide or move US profit, so it's doubly irrelevant. Double Irish Dutch Sandwiches don't do anything for money made in the US.
Is it because Google operates servers and whatnot in the US that they couldn't sell all their ad inventory at $1 to their Ireland division or another company or something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Fuck software patents... Absolutely. Copyright... Not so much. That is actually useful. Open source and free software would not work without copyright law. Copyright only triggers when you copy somebody else's work, I.e. a specific expression of an idea. Patents trigger when you merely happen to have the same idea.
> Copyright... Not so much. That is actually useful. Open source and free software would not work without copyright law. Not true at all. Copyleft licenses as currently written wouldn't work without copyright law; all-permissive licenses like MIT and BSD would become the default state. I'll happily take that trade, and several folks at the FSF and other FOSS organizations are on record saying the same.
> Even though there was no evidence of copying—Vringo admitted as much What a ridiculous system we all operate under. You come up with a mathematical formula for ranking some text on a page (in this case, what ads to show first), and you could now owe $250M/year to some company you've never heard of because they already bought the rights to that formula. It turns my stomach; sorry that I have nothing of more substanc…
They(and you), did hear of the company that originally got these patents. Here's the very interesting story behind the patents. http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/31/why-google-might-be-going-t... edit: I am rate limited from replying to fpgeeks reply below so I will post my reply here. First, the author is extremely clear that he invested in Vringo, in fact the whole article is about why he did so., so I am not sure why…
"Protection of intellectual property is what America is built on?" Hyperbole much?
"Smart people invent things. Then they get to protect [...] what they invents." Oversimplification much?
Not exactly a home-run defense of patents by Mr. Altucher.
[1]: As admitted by the article, there was no "stealing" here anyway.