Authored by: Gringo_ on Tuesday, December 11 2012 @ 07:46 AM EST |
Trolls have been getting all the attention lately, but I
don't think they
should be divorced from anti-competitive
use of patents in general, like
Microsoft's "Android tax" or
Apple's thermonuclear war. These are all the same
problem,
with the same roots - poor quality patents that should never
have
issued.
The myth that patents are given to protect and encourage
"innovation" must be challenged loudly until the general
public finally
understands that patents are the end product
of a broken and corrupt system,
rather than the reward for
inspiration and invention. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 11 2012 @ 10:27 AM EST |
Yeah, this case doesn't do much to solve the real problem,
which is that you can patent stuff that's not new. This
case establishes that there might (eventually) be a penalty
for suing under patents that the defendant obviously doesn't
violate. Example: claim limited to devices with a printer
inside the device's housing, defendant's device has an
external printer.
The Fed Circuit ruled that the defendant could pursue Rule
11 sanctions against the lawyers who brought this
abomination to court, but left it up to the district court
(same one who didn't think this case was worthy of Rule 11
sanctions) to decide (pending yet another appeal, of course)
whether the plaintiffs would have to pay the defendant's
legal costs.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 11 2012 @ 10:31 AM EST |
The Supreme's: Math is not patentable subject matter!
Mr. Quinn: Math
is patentable, you just have to word it the right way!
And does one
really believe Mr. Quinn won't attempt to enforce math patents even though the
Supreme's have made their position on the topic quite clear?
The Law has
one definition for patent trolls:
Non practicing entities
I have a
different definition:
Someone willing to game the patent system, to misuse
it in order to acquire patents that should not be. To then use those patents to
acquire money from the individuals that actually do the work in
society.
And yes: I believe playing word games to make math look like not
math is abusing the patent system.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 11 2012 @ 12:35 PM EST |
The Raylon patent is worthless. It is for a handheld device that a policeman
could use to scan an encoded strip on a driver's license and issue a traffic
ticket. The fact that the strip is there anticipates using it to issue a ticket.
The patent calls for a hinged display ("pivotally mounted") in every
claim. A device with a fixed display would not infringe.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|