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
A third way. | 354 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
A third way.
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 24 2012 @ 04:53 PM EST
And by demanding that details of the mechanism be included in all patents...
And here I was, assuming the USPTO already required such info:
The specification must include a written description of the invention and of the manner and process of making and using it, and is required to be in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the technological area to which the invention pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same.
[Pity the USPTO software examiners do not read the USPTO's own website.] for without such details of the mechainsm included in "full, clear, concise and exact terms" no one else will be able to build it!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Why permit an illegal land-grab?
Authored by: Wol on Saturday, November 24 2012 @ 05:40 PM EST
While it may be difficult, if we can show that software patents (as patents on
maths, free speech, or ideas) were illegally granted, they SHOULD just go
"pouf" in a cloud of smoke!

Cheers,
Wol

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

I'm not in a mood to compromise
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 25 2012 @ 04:37 AM EST
Patent advocates have ignored people in the software industry and run roughshod
over us for years. Why are they deserving of any consideration for their
incorrect ideas. Why should their greed and selfishness be accommodated. Get rid
of patents period. No compromise.

What you are saying is basically "Lets compromise and only pay the mafia
'some' protection money in future." Why would we want to do that?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

A third way.
Authored by: RideOn on Monday, November 26 2012 @ 01:26 PM EST
I'm not sure the comparison of the slide lock to a cubicle door or shed door
latch matters. If the patent is written so that the slide lock is described as
a method to prevent accidental actuation of controls on a touch sensitive
surface, which is precisely its purpose, then it may well be a novel mechanical
patent which applies only to functional devices. It could apply equally well to
a drawing toy with a switch to withdraw the working surface from contact with
the drawing stylus. The actual implementation in software is irrelevant and need
not be covered in the patent.

Programmers should no more have to be wary of the algorithms and techniques that
they use than a chef should have to be concerned that an inspired pairing of
three specific vegetables in a particular sauce may infringe on another
restaurant's menu offerings.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • A third way. - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 27 2012 @ 08:36 AM EST
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 )