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 447531
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Anti-competitive?
by grimshaid on Thu 28th Oct 2010 22:18 UTC in reply to "RE: Anti-competitive?"
grimshaid
Member since:
2010-10-28

I think you might have made one of the most important points in the discussion in noting the duration of patents vs the ever-evolving software market. Previous patents upon invention were based upon a time frame dictated by a much slower process of development. Inventions being protected for 25 years was a lot more reasonable when the devices had little need to change over that duration, and there were fewer alternatives available or even necessary. In the software market, by comparison, things change almost at the blink of an eye and the same duration on patents lends itself more to allowing monopolies than protecting the market.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Anti-competitive?
by Neolander on Fri 29th Oct 2010 17:39 in reply to "RE[2]: Anti-competitive?"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Well, several things sound broken in the software patent system, but the patent duration problem is the easiest to solve because it can be fixed with a simple change of law : reducing software patent lifetime.

The other major issue with software patents is when people are patenting the obvious (e.g. swipe to unlock), but solving this problem juridically would be much more difficult since "obvious" is hard to translate in legalese.

Edited 2010-10-29 17:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2