Linked by Eugenia Loli-Queru on Sat 15th May 2004 08:23 UTC
It is when I read articles like this that I have "my blood all going up to my head" (that's a Greek saying for people that get angry). So apparently, Apple is trying to patent "transparent windows that do a certain action after fading away". While I don't personally find this "innovation/invention" patentable, it's fine with me: Apple is doing the best it can to secure its business (maybe I would do the same if I had shareholders on my back).
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
My take on patents is this:
- patents are for your implementation of something. You find a way of doing something, you patent it to protect it since it's what your company/whatever is based off of.
- patents are not for the something you're doing.
Software patents on a particular implementation of a programming idea are okay. Patents on the idea (if you patented 'loading an image in a web browser') are not. So, the okay-er version of that would be (loading an image in a web browser using an algorithm to determine if it was pornographic or not and deciding not to display it)
Just in case people think patents are just totally evil....