Amazon owes $525M in cloud-storage patent fight, US jury says

Post by tsimionescu » Thu, Apr 11, 2024, 10:21 AM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #55

tsimionescu wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's supposed to be very unlikely, unless you're actively looking for trouble. In principle, patents are supposed to only be given out for inventions that pass a bar of novelty. If that were true (it often isn't), it should ensure that it's very very unlikely for others to arrive at the same patentable invention independently. If they do, tough luck to the second person. Still, patents become public from the moment t…

> Still, patents become public from the moment they are filed. No. There is an 18 month delay to publication: https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s1120.html

Post by datascienced » Thu, Apr 11, 2024, 10:28 AM UTC

spion wrote: post #52

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but how do you prove that it was after one of the teams publishes their work? It seems nearly impossible.

You can use the "dropping a hash" method (patio11 has used this). As you progress your work, you publish a hash of it using a service trusted by everyone to correctly identify the researchers and timestamp their hashes. If someone publishes the paper, you can then publish the files that resulted with the dropped hash and therefore prove you had certain progress of the work at a certain time.

Post by fauigerzigerk » Thu, Apr 11, 2024, 10:29 AM UTC

spion wrote: post #52

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but how do you prove that it was after one of the teams publishes their work? It seems nearly impossible.

You can use the "dropping a hash" method (patio11 has used this). As you progress your work, you publish a hash of it using a service trusted by everyone to correctly identify the researchers and timestamp their hashes. If someone publishes the paper, you can then publish the files that resulted with the dropped hash and therefore prove you had certain progress of the work at a certain time.

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 » Thu, Apr 11, 2024, 10:37 AM UTC

jampekka wrote: post #60

TrackerFF wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be an interesting experiment - a world where no patents exist, only production (though corporate espionage / theft is still illegal). Some argue that this will effectively kill R&D, because the second you've created something - others would start reverse engineering, and copy the product. In some areas, like pharma, R&D is notoriously expensive, and the pharma companies have only that many years to recoup al…

R&D can be done without profit motive. Most R is done in universities without profit motive. Some argue that nothing gets done if somebody doesn't get capital gains for it. This is of course empirically flat out false.

Post by deepsun » Thu, Apr 11, 2024, 10:49 AM UTC

nness wrote: post #38

Jochim wrote: post #35

The concept of intellectual property is antithetical to how humans have progressed socially and technologically for millenia. It's a wasteful aberration that strangles innovation with red tape and hands control of our culture over to those with the financial mean to claim to own it. The day we wrest back that control will be a good day.

The first patent was issued in the 1400's — it is exactly how humans have progressed technologically and sociality. Let's stop being so absolutist about these topics. The problem here isn't that patents exist, intellectual property protection is critical to investment and research. The issue here is two fold: 1. Patents usually involve a lot of research — and existed as a way to ensure that competition couldn't imita…