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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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
Legal vs Illegal | 158 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Yes, we know there are a lot of people that would like to reap the benefit of others hard work
Authored by: nuthead on Friday, July 13 2012 @ 01:22 PM EDT
Show me an original invention- thought up, designed and
developed completely in a vacuum, without relying on ANY
ideas someone else came up with and I'll show you an
invention that deserves a patent.

When you get down to it, EVERYONE draws on the "hard work" of
others.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Yes, we know there are a lot of people that would like to reap the benefit of others hard work
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 13 2012 @ 01:38 PM EDT
They are commonly referred to as trolls. They stake a claim, any claim will do,
and claim that you trespass on their property.
Since the cost of defending yourself against even the most bogus claims is so
high, you can effectively extort hard-earned money from someone else.
Given that there is hardly any area where patents work, abolishing them
altogether to stop the extortion is closer to fair than keeping patents alive.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Process: "Enter 1 + 1 = into a calculator to get the result" - patent granted
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 13 2012 @ 04:00 PM EDT

Even patents don't grant ultimate control.

While some patent attorney's have argued that:

    a "process of entering 1 + 1 = into a calculator to get the result" is patentable
That certainly doesn't mean someone using a calculator to perform math should be considered to be "reap[ing] the benefit of the hard work of others without paying for it".

I do believe that part of the Sanity of Patent Law still allows someone to properly purchase a patented invention (the calculator) and then use it free of any other claims of licensing for the task(s) it was built for:

    Process math formulas!
A third party that comes along later and tries to lay claim to a specific math formula (or more generic math formula) applied to the calculator is the one that's in the wrong. And in my very humble opinion, the USPTO1 is doubly wrong for having granted the patent.

The individual who purchased said device is not the one to be accused of wrong-doing.

Some day, I hope the Supreme's finally realize that programming a computer with software is nothing more then using a calculator. Even better would be if the Politicians understood that.

It's only the deliberate obfuscation that the Patent Lawyers themselves bring into the picture that causes software to be so complex that it's magical.

RAS

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Legal vs Illegal
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 13 2012 @ 07:03 PM EDT

It seems some would rather focus on the context:

    whether or not you can do [legally] anything you want with things you buy
Obviously you can't. If you murder someone with your vehicle - running them down - you can be convicted of murder.

I do not condone taking the Law into one's own hands except in the most of extreme circumstances. For example:

    I frown on people who choose to deliberately speed
and to outline an extreme where taking the Law into your own hands would be justified:
    If I had been a German under the leadership of Hitler and was given the order to kill people in a camp just because - I'd like to think I'd have chosen to be just as civilized as I am today and reject such an order - instead, turning and fighting against what Hitler presented as the future - to follow through with the orders is the far greater crime to humanity then disobeying such a Law as requires you to follow the orders
Is someone justified in jail breaking their phone? Prior to the Legal decision that made it Legal, I said no. I agreed they should have that right, but I didn't agree with the choice to do it regardless of what Copyright Law and the DMCA changes to same said. But then the Law was changed and jailbreaking was made Legal!

So to put my belief simply: illegal things should not be done - there are generally very good reasons for the Law.

However, that doesn't mean Bad Laws don't happen. Rosa Parks fought such a Law.

And there are many ways to fight one views as bad Law. I choose intelligent discussion. Some choose to officially rebel against the Law as Rosa Parks did. Others choose to rebel against the Law not so openly as many people do when they choose to speed.

And therein lies the current state of Patent Law and how it seems to be getting applied today:

    Some view Patent Law itself as bad and so they fight it
    Some view at least part of the application of Patent Law as bad and so fight those inappropriate applications
    Some view the decisions made on what to patent ad bad and so they fight that
    Some view Patent Law as not extending far enough and so they fight for that
And no - just because some of us fight the current state of Patent Law, just because some of us fight against what some would like Patent Law to become:
    That doesn't inherently make us bad people!
Freedom of speech allows me to voice my opinion that:
    The process "enter 1 + 1 = in a calculator" should never be considered patentable subject matter!
Fighting bad law is a concept that is allowed in civilized Society. How you fight it, may or may not be illegal!

RAS

[ 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 )