Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 27th Aug 2010 22:11 UTC, submitted by lfeagan
Thread beginning with comment 438545
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
"I think an important additional rule would be that the patent holder is explicitly required to actually make use of the patented technology within a certain time period, e.g. two years. Failure to do so should invalidate this patent's protection.
DING DING DING!! We have a winner! By making no other changes to the system than this, we can ensure that patents are used for their intended purpose. No need to even touch the Constitution, as this is completely in line with its intended purpose. Bad patents are a bug, and this is a simple, elegant fix. " What would you define as a making use? Do you have to have a product, prototype, drawings, research or what? If you have a product, does it have to be competitive or can I sell a quantum computer that can only add 1+1 while I work out the bugs (which may take a few years)
Edited 2010-08-30 16:06 UTC




Member since:
2005-07-06
Failure to do so should invalidate this patent's protection.
DING DING DING!! We have a winner!
By making no other changes to the system than this, we can ensure that patents are used for their intended purpose. No need to even touch the Constitution, as this is completely in line with its intended purpose.
Bad patents are a bug, and this is a simple, elegant fix.