decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

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


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
obvious to one not skilled in the art | 234 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Developing such tech is irresponsible & unethical in the first place - n/t
Authored by: Gringo_ on Wednesday, November 07 2012 @ 11:58 PM EST

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

obvious to one not skilled in the art
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 08 2012 @ 04:18 AM EST
I remember when the PlayStation Eye was released late in 2007 (and itself based
on the PS2 EyeToy of circa 2003), i had many pub discussions on how a camera
could be used to charge a differing rate for watching a BD film (or DRM
encumbered streaming movie) depending on how many viewers were present and
watching the movie. My mates thought i was paranoid and that nobody would
develop such a system.

And in April 2011, MS files a patent outlining such nonsense.

For me, the very fact that pub discussions can occur only reinforces the notion
that such 'inventions' should not be patentable as they are obvious.

Unfortunately it seems that when such obvious notions are discussed by those NOT
skilled in the art of programing or video distribution, or DRM or whatever
category such 'inventions' could be placed under, if it is not written down and
published in some way (by laypeople), any unscrupulous person can patent such
notions some 4 years later and it will be granted by the USTPO.

There just seems to be no logic to the notion of 'obvious' or an acceptance that
some things are so obvious they will never be written down. It seems there is
something really sick with the patent system and the minds that allow such
obvious nonsence.

Sadly this pales into insignificance when compared with the morals of those that
develop such spying systems. Imaging how effective Hitler could have been if
facial recognition systems were on every street corner and in your living room
AND the state had you on their ID system under the guise of 'protecting the
people'. Now imaging the state doesn't want YOU breathing because Hitler Version
2 has come to power and just doesn't like you breathing his air.

But only in America, where the people have the right to bear arms, can others
develop such systems to deprive one of life and liberty! And it's all protected
by the patent system.

[ 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 )