|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 04 2013 @ 05:43 PM EDT |
I like the idea in principle. I think there may be cases where it doesn't work,
because the end-user is using a product in a way the manufacturer didn't
anticipate (different from the normal use of the product). Very likely this is a
case where I wouldn't like the patent, because it is too broad, but perhaps
there would be valid instances.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 04 2013 @ 07:20 PM EDT |
As long as software patents exist would this not put all contributors to FOSS
in danger? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 04 2013 @ 09:29 PM EDT |
If the patent holder wins his case against a manufacturer of an infringing
product, the patent holder is then fully compensated for the infringement. Being
fully compensated, why should the patent holder be allowed to sue end users?
Seems like double dipping to me!
The patent holder should be required to sue the manufacturer of an infringing
product and regardless if patent holder wins or looses, he should then be barred
from suing any end users of the product as he has been compensated.
Going after end users is just a ploy to extort money from those less able to
afford a legal defense and likely to just pay up. It's just driven by bad laws
and greedy.
But then it seems greed is what is rewarded in the USofA. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|