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 345445
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
melgross
Member since:
2005-08-12

Who is "we"?

What does "harmful" mean?

Does it mean to you that a company invents something unique and then profits from their invention, so that other companies are forced to find other ideas of their own?

I find that to be a good thing, not a bad thing. That's one of the points to patents. It forces others to come up with more ideas, rather than all using one idea and not advancing.

Software patents are no different from others. You can be sure that if computers were around during the time our country was formed (and all others as well), patents would have also covered software.

The only problem is that the software industry moves faster than others, and so software patents are too long. As I've mentioned, it should likely be for 7 years, as that seems to be about the time the industry gets turned upside down.

Edited 2009-01-25 20:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

What does "harmful" mean?


Harmful means that by being far too vague, most patents in the computer/software industry tend to stifle smaller companies that come up with different solutions that look alike.

As far as I'm concerned, a patent should only be granted if the applicant can show a working example of the idea he's trying to patent. That prototype must be delivered alongside the patent. The patent is only applicable to the specific implementation employed by the prototype.

Tying a patent to a prototype this way makes patents much more specific, and less harmful because competing companies would have a much better idea of what the patent covers, and what not.

Patents are not harmful. Intentionally vague patents without working prototypes are.

Edited 2009-01-25 21:13 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

cycoj Member since:
2007-11-04


Software patents are no different from others. You can be sure that if computers were around during the time our country was formed (and all others as well), patents would have also covered software.


This is rubbish, books were around when the patent system was invented and patents on books were/are not allowed, for good reason, they are protected by copyright, same as software. Somebody who says we should allow patents on software or business concepts should also say we should allow patents on books, storylines, because it's exactly the same thing. Today's world would be a pretty sad place if that would've been allowed to happen.

Reply Parent Score: 2