Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

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

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

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:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

I never look at patent text... I want to remain a programmer. | 439 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

I never look at patent text... I want to remain a programmer.

Authored by: BitOBear on Tuesday, May 15 2012 @ 12:29 PM EDT

The sad part of all this is that Software Patents are too dangerous for
programmers to read to read for fear of enhanced liability.

See, the patents themselves, the few I -have- read, and all those I hear of,
claim the basic tools of my trade as if they are new found art. They do so in
terms so broad that as a person normally skilled in the art the claims are
meaningless and so impossible to avoid.

This double-bind is so insidious that nobody with a brain and an intent to
program for any purpose would dare consult anything "taught" by such
dire text for fear of multi-million dollar liabilities at random future dates.

So the USPTO has created a fundamental trap to make knowledge illegal and to
thereby -retard- the useful arts and sciences in direct contravention of its
constitutional mandate.

So let me be clear, I have not and will not read the actual patent.

[ 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 )