|
Authored by: OpenSourceFTW on Saturday, November 24 2012 @ 02:15 PM EST |
Ehh, I don't think that is a good idea.
Sounds like it will simply exacerbate the problem by formally inaugurating it.
Also, what if the company changes it's mind? Gets bought out by a company that
didn't make that election? Buys a company that didnt?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 24 2012 @ 02:58 PM EST |
Right now it is profitable to have patents because you can sue other people who
don't have patents and they can't sue you back. Once you remove those company's
and put them in a separate pool though there is no money to be made. You get a
cascading effect where first the smallest company's become unsueable, then as
there is no money to be made suing and lots of money to lose the slightly bigger
companies decide to become unsueable. And so on.
This would certainly not make Microsoft of Apple happy.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Ian Al on Sunday, November 25 2012 @ 02:46 AM EST |
There are no software patents.
As my byline has stated for years, the patents are for abstract ideas (abstract
functions) expressed as over-broad claims with the magic words 'a method and/or
a system comprising a computer with memory'. Just take out the 'or a system
comprising a computer with memory' and you still have the patented abstract
function invention with which to sue folk.
Of course, you lose out on the machine part of the duality, but, hey, even
business methods are patentable in the US.
The closest thing we have ever got to a patent on software was in Benson, which
was the patenting of an algorithm to convert BCD into binary numbers. Even that
was 'doing math on a computer'.
Any company declaring that they will neither apply for software patents or sue
over software patents will say that their patents are not on software, but are
utility patents on the patentable functions, 'swipe to unlock' or 'unobtrusive
notifications' or 'using an interweb'.
No, no, definitely not software patents: there isn't a software in there... or
even a pony.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- The fatal flaw - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 26 2012 @ 12:49 AM EST
|
|
|
|