decoration decoration

When you want to know more...
For layout only
Site Map
About Groklaw
Legal Research
ApplevSamsung p.2
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Gordon v MS
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
MS Litigations
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
OOXML Appeals
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v Novell
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal

User Functions



Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

The Problems With Software Patents | 217 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Google Australia
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 27 2012 @ 11:03 PM EST
I suppose Google could stop indexing any sites in Australia (.au). This could
safeguard them from similar lawsuits. I'm not sure Australians would like it

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Ericsson sues Samsung
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 28 2012 @ 01:16 AM EST
Seems the gang of 5 is a little confused.
Microsoft is suing Motorola, because they don't want to pay the FRAND rates, but
when Samsung tries to avoid negotiate new FRAND terms Ericsson sues them.

So do they want FRAND agreeements to hold or not?

Or do they prefer android companies spend money on legal fees rather than
R&D and will argue either side to achieve their goals.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Judge orders tobacco companies to say they lied
Authored by: Nick_UK on Wednesday, November 28 2012 @ 04:33 AM EST
But does tobacco kill as many people as politicians do (and could a court order
tell these people not to lie also)?


[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Two Worlds of Software Patents
Authored by: TheOldBear on Wednesday, November 28 2012 @ 10:19 AM EST

The blog posting and comments thread shows that the two worlds are not communicating

The author [Michael Risch] posted as a comment:

A few comments here, and I plan to put an update in the main body of the post: TJ - Of course I'm painting with too broad a brush - it is a blog post, after all, not a journal article. But I don't think I'm far off the mark. I do make clear that a) bridging is easier if you would bar software patents, and b) utilitarians can't agree on the right outcome. It's all still within the utilitarian framework. As for the "show me a beneficial, non-obvious software patent" comments, I had that debate at Groklaw - there's no room (and I don't have the time) to do it again here! More in the main body.

I may have missed this on Groklaw, but has there been a single example presented of a patented piece of software being useful?

Useful in this context would be seeking out the patented material by searching the published claims for the patent, then either licensing the patent or implementing the invention described in an expired patent.

This would specifically exclude the common case where the notification that a patent claim may apply is being the target of a lawsuit.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Two Worlds of Software Patents
Authored by: Gringo_ on Wednesday, November 28 2012 @ 10:21 AM EST

Dr. Michael Risch deserves a great deal of credit for the effort and lengths he has gone to trying to understand the broad range of views against software patents shared by most Groklaw members and commenters. He has certainly earned my respect for his efforts, even thought it appears we haven't convinced him.

He has clearly read all or most of our comments to his Groklaw post, and listened to "our side" closely at the Santa Clara Law School conference. What more can we expect of a man than this?

In the end, it does not matter if he is convinced. What matters is what we all think, as citizens. If each of us expends even a tiny fraction of the effort Dr. Rich has gone to to arrive at an informed opinion, and we all take a vote, it is that, the sum total of all our thoughts that should prevail.

However, going back to Dr. Rich's efforts to understand "our" point of view - I have a tiny suggestion that he may find helpful. When discussing the Santa Clara Law School conference, it appeared logical and convenient to many to speak in terms of the views of "two opposing sides" on the issue of software patents. Then to continue the discussion labels are required state which side is being referred to at any given moment.

Now it seems easy to find a label for the side that believes that software patents are beneficial, (even if some tweaking to patent law could improve their benefit). Dr. Rich refers to them as the "utilitarians". "On the one hand, you have the utilitarians, who believe that the costs of patenting might be worth the benefits of patenting".

A label for the other side is not so easy. For this side, Dr. Rich calls them "friends of free software". "On the other hand, you have what I'll call the friends of free software (more fully called FOSS - Free and Open-source Software)".

This label may not be helpful to Dr. Rich. Take me for example. I am a programmer, and dead against software patents. However, I could hardly be called "a friend of free software". In fact, I am a friend of proprietary software! That is how I make my living.

Now I do have enormous respect for FOSS, and recognize its profound significance and importance. I'll certainly never be "an enemy of free software", that's for sure.

I just want Dr. Rich to understand, one doesn't need to be a "a friend of free software" to be against software patents.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Judge orders tobacco companies to say they lied
Authored by: cricketjeff on Wednesday, November 28 2012 @ 10:46 AM EST
With the tobacco story and the Apple v Samsung case in the EU have the world's judges found a new sanction?

There is nothing in life that doesn't look better after a good cup of tea.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

The Problems With Software Patents
Authored by: jbb on Wednesday, November 28 2012 @ 10:36 PM EST

This is the best article on software patents I have ever seen.

Our job is to remind ourselves that there are more contexts
than the one we’re in now — the one that we think is reality.
-- Alan Kay

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Mozilla and German lawmakers spar in increasingly furious 'link tax' row
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 05:00 AM EST
When many people disagree with you, they "monopolising" opinion-making

So where are the FairSearch guys on this :p.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )