Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 21 2012 @ 08:15 PM EDT |
Any attempt to make radical changes to the patent system in the US is doomed to
failure so long as change must be mediated via a government system that is
itself corrupt. Before PJ slaps me down here let me clarify that I don't mean
corrupt in the sense of individuals being dishonest, accepting bribes and so on.
I mean that the system is corrupt. It is dysfunctional, unduly influenced by
money, and unable to act in the best interests of the nation. Unless this is
corrected any reform efforts that come through that system are likely to become
corrupted to serve only the interests of large corporate political donors. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: N_au on Wednesday, August 22 2012 @ 02:02 AM EDT |
If I was Samsung and I lost this case I would dump this investment. I wouldn't
stay in a country that penalises me for competing with a company that originated
in that country but now makes nothing there but imports it all. Also the
"IP" it is suing over is so flimsy.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 22 2012 @ 07:01 AM EDT |
Patent
Pounding
No Apple did not really invent tablets. It was not even
the
first in a new trend of portable computing. Changing the
search for heavier
desk and laptops with more and more power
in the desire to have something you
could carry
with just enough functionality. For
me that was the
one-laptop-per-child project that introduced
low-priced gear that could be used
on many places. And the
trend that followed changed the market. Apple didn't
copy
the low priced part.
It did not change the portable telephone
either. That was
RIM with the Blackberry for me. The Canadian company very
early slammed with a patent lawsuit for US courts form a
troll. And forced to
settle or risking that the network
would be taken
down.
But Apple made
nice global concepts, mostly
commercial concepts, of all those ideas and pushed
them very
consequently trough. And could provide good user support
thanks to
its one-supplier environment. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Patent Pounding - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 22 2012 @ 07:55 AM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 22 2012 @ 10:06 AM EDT |
http://www.businessinsider.com/a-software-
entrepreneur-on-the-madness-of-software-patents-and-trolls-
2012-8 "An
d just like with illegal extortion,
patent extortion causes real personal and
economic pain:
I wake up in the middle of the night with my hands clenched
like
lobster claws. I’ve actually cried from the injustice
and worry" [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 22 2012 @ 11:05 AM EDT |
In other news: The Scientific Method Works!
Oh, wait. That's the same news.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 22 2012 @ 02:46 PM EDT |
Apparently the CondiCup was applied for in 2005, whereas the Heinz patent was
applied for on 8th of January 2004.
The person most likely to be the first to invent, based on this information, is
Alexander van Puijenbroek, not Mr. White.
By the time he contacted Heinz, they already had applied for a patent.
How come the USPTO approved both?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 22 2012 @ 03:18 PM EDT |
ya dont worry that its 168 times cheaper now it will be same
or more after the kids patent gets into play
yup advancing man patents do not work in the usa and need to
get fixed[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 29 2012 @ 11:10 AM EDT |
Are Apple's innovations inside us now : NO, -
it just go to show that we are creating prior art every moment in our daily live
, even for baby !
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|