|
| Authored by: pcrooker on Sunday, June 10 2012 @ 09:58 PM EDT |
2. Eliminate patent trolls. S/w patents could be sold only to
practicing entities. Trolling _never_ contributes anything useful to
society.
Yes, but the trolls will just create a phony "practicing
entity" to meet the legal requirement, just as they have "offices" in Texas so
they can file patent claims. If there are to be software patents, trolls must be
punished with substantial fines (ala Righthaven) or they will continue to plague
the industry.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 10 2012 @ 11:16 PM EDT |
This gets my vote.
Patents were codified in the time when it took a long time develop things, and
sales were also similarly low, so it was reasonable to enforce a patent for 17
years. Being able to sell something to a billion people in one day gives a whole
different viewpoint as to how long something should be protected. Would it
make more sense to license from someone for a year than to create a
workaround?
Is one year the right period? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: mrisch on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 02:23 PM EDT |
1. I agree that terms are too long. 1 year may be too short.
2. I disagree about trolls. On a theoretical matter, it is
unclear whether the additional liquidity fuels investment
(my article called Patent Troll Myths is inconclusive on
this). On a practical matter, we'll just see practicing
companies buying and enforcing - which they are doing now.
3. As for the swype, I feel like the analysis is a bit of
hindsight bias. Yes, sure, all the pieces were there, but if
they were there back in 1986. Of course it was all easy once
you let go of the idea that you have to enter each letter
separately, but the idea of inputting the whole word with
one touch is an important one, even if it was obvious at the
time - but that's the part of the patent to focus on that
can't be explained by all of the old art you (and others)
have cited.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: rebentisch on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 07:36 PM EDT |
That is a misconception. First of all the system is suited for 20 years
protection and that is the term internationally fixed by WTO TRIPs, shorter
terms are not feasible. Examination usually takes years.
Furthermore you fail to make the case why these patents are beneficial.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
