Linked by weildish on Sat 24th Jan 2009 22:44 UTC
Legal Several days ago when Apple hinted at legal action against Palm, we held our breath to see just what would happen. Now Palm has stepped up to the plate boldly and hinted that they'd fight whatever legal action is thrown at them.
Thread beginning with comment 345404
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Beautiful system - they're not the first
by jabbotts on Sun 25th Jan 2009 13:46 UTC in reply to "Beautiful system"
jabbotts
Member since:
2007-09-06

I wouldn't hold that against Palm. They are still a young company. The use of patents by big business was well established by the time they turned up.

That's not to say that patent law is not a mess corrupted from it's original intent; only that Palm is responding to a previously established legal environment.

Now, if Palm as actively attacking other companies through patent litigation then that's something to condemn.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Adurbe Member since:
2005-07-06

its not a popular view on this site, as a portion of my negative marks will profess, but I believe apple to be perfectly within their rights to try and defend what they feel they invented

Apple doubtless spent a great deal of development money and they should have the right to defend that invention

If you want to see how a economic system works without patent/ip protections of the Anglo/Saxon economies then China is a perfect example (pre joining the wto, they have since started to embrace ipr in certain sectors).

Reply Parent Score: 3

_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

I guess many of the negative comments here stem from the fact that none of us really see what patents of apple's palm is infringing.

And if palm is in fact infringing on an apple patent, that patent is probably horribly vague and generally harmful to the industry and not just protective of apple ip.

Reply Parent Score: 11

TheBadger Member since:
2005-11-14

its not a popular view on this site, as a portion of my negative marks will profess, but I believe apple to be perfectly within their rights to try and defend what they feel they invented


"Invented", eh? Even the user interface domain is stuffed full of prior art.

Apple doubtless spent a great deal of development money and they should have the right to defend that invention


Everyone wants their fifteen minutes of fame to last forever, but you actually need to keep up the hard work for that to happen.

If you want to see how a economic system works without patent/ip protections of the Anglo/Saxon economies then China is a perfect example (pre joining the wto, they have since started to embrace ipr in certain sectors).


If you're referring to the production of fake goods, there are a range of instruments other than patents which would deal with that problem adequately. And by using "ip" you're deliberately blurring the issues. Many people who advocate the abolition of patents in various fields don't advocate the abolition of copyright because copyright not only functions adequately as a "protection", but it's also completely clear when someone has infringed copyright: they've either acquired (and probably massaged) the work or they haven't. With patents, you can rediscover some technique and do all the hard work yourself and then be sued for treading on someone's turf.

And now that China's bureaucrats have discovered the easy money in "intellectual property", what has happened? A deluge of junk patents which will ultimately be used to stifle competition. In fact, they've even "innovated" in making new categories of junk patents. Welcome to the club, eh?

Reply Parent Score: 5

spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

I believe it is not about Anglo/Saxon vs China. If you go that way, you have to look at the whole story. China didn't invade tibet because they didn't have software patents. Look, Hitler was vegetarian, do you see what you will become if you are vegetarian? China's economy and Anglo/Saxon economies are more complex than that.
Just pointing out that China didn't do software patents and failed doesn't mean removing software patents will make you fail.

Edited 2009-01-25 21:35 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

Nice of you to through China in there. That should get the US folks good and riled.. well.. with the number of replies here already.. it did.

I agree that Apple or any other company has a right to protect there patents but no one outside Apple and Palm's legal teams know how valid those patents really are. It could even be simple scare tactics to scare sales away from the competition or simply posturing to keep the shareholder's happy.

But in reply to your point about looking east for how a market with no patent or copywrite laws functions; I think patent and copywrite law need to be reformed not removed. Patents on software is an obsurdity:

- software is a complicated math formula; math formulas are not patentable

- software is the written form of business processes; business processes are not patentable

- software patents are more often used to limit the evolution of computing which does not in any way help the "little guy" or end user

- software is easily duplicated at minimal cost unlike the physical goods that patents where intended to cover; sharing your (if license allows) shoftware with a second party does not deprive you of the software

- we already have something that protects written and other forms of art; copywrite

What was once created to protect independent inventors from having there creations stollen by big business has evolved into an arms race between big businesses and barrier to competition through chilling effects.

Reply Parent Score: 3