Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 21st Mar 2011 22:52 UTC, submitted by ephracis
Thread beginning with comment 467285
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
You know being a witch is illegal in a lot of places. You sound like a witch. Lets burn you at the stake. Cause after all, the law is the law, right? Just because a law exists does not make it right or even Constitutional. Patents were never suppose to cover software and there is actually no law that says it should. All that exists is court interpretations.
Well, by that logic, we should disregard all current laws because they could theoretically be invalidated by some future action by the legislature/courts. Where does it end? Or is this really just about disregarding laws that you don't like?
RE[2]: the law is the law
by Soulbender on Tue 22nd Mar 2011 05:52
in reply to "RE: the law is the law"
"Patents were never suppose to cover software and there is actually no law that says it should.
Even more ironic is the reason why patents exist; to protect the little inventor from the big companies.
Yeah, that worked out really well... "
Can you find some authoritative source that even alludes to that being the reason patents exist? Cause I'm pretty much 100% positive that you are incorrect.





Member since:
2006-01-14
You know being a witch is illegal in a lot of places. You sound like a witch. Lets burn you at the stake. Cause after all, the law is the law, right?
Just because a law exists does not make it right or even Constitutional. Patents were never suppose to cover software and there is actually no law that says it should. All that exists is court interpretations. Furthermore there are laws dictating the scope and documentation that are suppose to accompany patent applications. The fact that these patents are so flimsy looking on the surface suggests that Microsoft didn't do its duty when applying for the patents.
So before you start chanting for equality, you should make sure Microsoft hasn't already side-stepped the law to get to this point.