Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 28th Oct 2010 18:02 UTC, submitted by viator
Legal If you can't compete, litigate. This train of thought has been quite prevalent among major technology companies as of late, most notably by Apple and Microsoft, who both cannot compete with Android on merit, so they have to resort to patent lawsuits and FUD. Both Asustek and Acer have revealed that Microsoft plans to impose royalty fees upon the two Taiwanese hardware makers to prevent them from shipping Android and/or Chrome OS devices.
Thread beginning with comment 447510
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by rubberneck
by tomcat on Thu 28th Oct 2010 21:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by rubberneck"
tomcat
Member since:
2006-01-06

Good people violate bad laws. If the law told you to kill a kitten evry morning, would you do it?


Patents aren't "bad laws". They're a fundamental part of our U.S. constitution.

Reply Parent Score: -6

RE[4]: Comment by rubberneck
by TheGZeus on Thu 28th Oct 2010 21:17 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by rubberneck"
TheGZeus Member since:
2010-05-19

Software didn't exist then, and patents on 'processes' didn't exist until the 1960s.

History fail.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[5]: Comment by rubberneck
by tomcat on Thu 28th Oct 2010 21:30 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by rubberneck"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Software didn't exist then, and patents on 'processes' didn't exist until the 1960s. History fail.


That's beside the point. Patents protect inventions. Whether those ideas are manifested in software or physical atoms is irrelevant.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

I suggest you read your own constitution. You don't want to pull an O'Donnell in public.

Reply Parent Score: 3

v RE[5]: Comment by rubberneck
by tomcat on Thu 28th Oct 2010 21:31 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by rubberneck"
imthefrizzlefry Member since:
2010-10-28

I think the problem is that these patents don't seem to promote the progress of the sciences or the useful arts. All they seem to do is make the market less competitive by forcing companies to pay large sums of "protection" money, or go out of business trying to fight it in civil court.

After making a claim, Microsoft will require a court order for every line of code that needs to be questioned, meaning that both parties need to pay large court fees. In the end, who ever has the biggest budget will win.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Comment by rubberneck
by dsmogor on Fri 29th Oct 2010 18:49 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by rubberneck"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

Promoting a system that allows patenting BS, obvious ideas is simply a protectionism. And US trade authorities should have it's ass kicked before some international body for that.

Reply Parent Score: 2