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
To answer your question: that's not the real issue to me! | 124 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Pretty much
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 22 2012 @ 05:48 AM EST
Software patents are usually idea/pattern style patents and don't generally seem
to be limited enough to be fair or even practical (remember the whole idea of a
patent is a reward for disclosing a nonobvious implementation) - eg the slide to
unlock patent doesn't just protect Apple's implementation, it protects *any*
implementation.

Of course a patent that only protected the specific way/code/language etc Apple
did it would be useless (and redundant, hi copyright), but that just emphasizes
the differences with "normal" patents even more.

They're often interpreted very broadly too and taken as applying to things not
even invented at the time of filing. Most patents on both side in the MS vs
Motorola circus seem to fall into that category.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

patents = problem patents
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 22 2012 @ 07:14 AM EST
I've yet to see an example of the patent system in general working as
advertised.

Going all the way back to heavier-than-air flight and steam engines, all patents
do is get in the way of progress, because they're based on bad assumptions:
"Invention happens in big leaps, not small increments" and "only
one person will intent something, no two people are working on the same problem
at the same time"

Both of those are blatently false, yet those are the assumptions that the patent
system rests on.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

To answer your question: that's not the real issue to me!
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 22 2012 @ 03:23 PM EST

Software patents to me are exactly patents on the process of "enter 2 + 2 = on a calculator and read the result on the screen".

Sorry. The Calculator was the patented invention. To use the device for nothing more then what it was built for should not be patentable. Your not building something bigger like adding computer controls to gyros and such to create the first robot.... you're using it strictly for it's most basic application.

To patent that formula is analogous to meaning you can also patent "use a pencil and 10 weight paper to author your biography" and you can patent "use a pencil and 12 weight paper to author your biography" and you can patent "use a pen and 10 weight paper to author your biography".

And I have no idea where to begin to try and explain to someone who actually believes you should be able to patent using a pencil vs a pen why that should not be so. To myself there's so much obviously wrong with that, to suggest to do it leaves me stunned at the (in my humble opinion) absurdity of the suggestion itself.

It's like when someone actually wanted to create a Law that says PI = 3!

Just... WOW!

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 )