Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 9th Jun 2011 20:40 UTC
"The Supreme Court ruled against Microsoft on Thursday in its appeal of a record $290 million jury verdict for infringing a small Canadian software firm's patent. The justices unanimously upheld an appeals court's ruling that went against the world's largest software company in its legal battle with Toronto-based i4i Limited Partnership. The smaller company had argued that Microsoft Word had infringed its method for editing documents. Microsoft contended that i4i's patent was invalid."
Thread beginning with comment 476779
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.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
At an event earlier today, Microsoft unveiled the next Xbox - the third model, but confusingly named Xbox One. The big focus was TV, integrated Kinect, and all the other stuff we all expected to be forced down our throats. I think it took them 25 minutes to actually come to what should be the core of the story: gaming. Nothing groundbreaking in the gaming department, except for how Microsoft intends to handle the used games market and borrowing games from friends: pay up, buddy!
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
The day has finally come! Jolla has finally announced the launch device for its Sailfish operating system - and by god this is a looker. It's decidedly different from other phones out there, but it has good specifications and carries a relatively reasonably price tag - EUR 399, and it's up for pre-order today, shipping in the fourth quarter of this year.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Why does Google get so much credit in the technology industry? Why, despite the company's many obvious failings, do many geeks and enthusiasts still hold a somewhat positive view on the all-knowing technology giant? A specific talk at Google I/O this week provides the answer.
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
OSNews is a sponsor of this year's O'Reilly OSCON in Portland, Oregon, USA. A lucky OSNews reader will win a free three-day pass, including two tutorials days. To win the pass, post a comment on this story saying something about Open Source Software or OSCON. We'll pick a winner at random next week. If you don't have an OSNews account, you may email us your entry. Part of the conference is the 9th annual Open Source Awards, and today the 16th is the deadline for nominations. If you'd like to nominate an outstanding open source contributor, do it here. Read on for more information about OSCON. Update: The 20% discount code for OSNews readers is "OSN."
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
"Windows is indeed slower than other operating systems in many scenarios, and the gap is worsening." That's one way to start an insider explanation of why Windows' performance isn't up to snuff. Written by someone who actually contributes code to the Windows NT kernel, the comment on Hacker News, later deleted but reposted with permission on Marc Bevand's blog, paints a very dreary picture of the state of Windows development. The root issue? Think of how Linux is developed, and you'll know the answer.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
This is one of those news items that's fun to write, fun to read, fun to comment on, and where no one will be able to say anything unkind. It's all just one big ball of awesome fluffiness. TuneTracker, the BeOS radio automation software, has just released something very special: TuneTracker System 5, the first version designed entirely and specifically for Haiku. In fact, it actually includes Haiku in the software package. Better yet, TuneTracker also unveiled several system-in-a-box products - which have Haiku and TuneTracker pre-installed.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Exactly twenty years ago, a document was published that played a huge role in establishing the web as we know it today. Twenty years later, and this simple and straightforward document is proof of an irrefutable fact: while closed technologies can change markets, open technologies can change the world.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Oh multitasking. That staple of computing that got thrown out the window with many modern smartphones. We got some rudimentary thing in its place - but even as multitasking on phone and tablets improves, its user-visible side remains cumbersome. Windows 8 has a neat implementation, and now it's time Android follows in it footsteps.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
They're here! Whether that excites you or not remains to be seen, but the Galaxy S4, which will most likely become the best selling Android smartphone of the year by a huge margin, has been reviewed by all the major sites, and there's lots of interesting conclusions in there - although I think most of you will get the gist.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
Nokia has posted its quarterly results for the first quarter of 2013, and just like the quarters that came before, there's not a whole lot of good news in there. The rise in Lumia sales still can't even dream of making up for the sales drop in Symbian phones, and when broken down in versions, the sales figures for Windows Phone 8 Lumias in particular are very disappointing. In North America, Nokia is getting slaughtered.More Features »
Sponsored Links
Member since:
2011-01-28
malxau,
"If a developer resides in a jurisdiction where a patent doesn't apply, they still must consider that a patent may apply in a different jurisdiction if they distribute software there. In theory a developer is expected to examine patents in literally every jurisdiction they distribute to, and arrange licenses if necessary in each, which is clearly absurd."
It's interesting that you highlighted an issue which would not be a problem if software patents were simply eliminated.
The existence of software patents in some jurisdictions should not rationalize the implementation of software patents in other jurisdictions. Software patents need to be considered on their own merit.
"Currently in the US the government takes patent filing fees and spends them outside of the patent system. This leaves the PTO underfunded and unable to review patents adequately, which is one of Brad's complaints."
I agree they're underfunded. However the review costs are not fixed per developer, they actually increase exponentially as the pool of developers grows.
Say another country implements an identical system on an identical scale, which costs the same as well. Now these two countries want to merge/coordinate their patent systems for the reasons you mention (which should be procedurally trivial given that they are identical). Can you see that it's necessarily going to require even more work for patent reviewers to do their jobs in a unified system which has doubled in size? How much is this extra work going to cost?
Now apply this escalating workload world-wide over dissimilar patent systems and the costs can only increase.
Is the work being done at the PTO actually productive? On a macro-economic scale, we're all (indirectly) paying for the software patent filling fees, administrative attorney overhead, and let's not forget the lawsuits. Isn't it conceivable that our efforts might be better spent on more worthy endeavors?
"I agree on that, although I find it strange that many on the internet have jumped to the conclusion that software patents should not exist."
Shouldn't the burden be on those claiming a software patent system is needed?
"Personally I'd find it strange if an algorithm in hardware can be patent protected but cannot be in software; and I wonder what distortions that would unleash on the market."
I don't think algorithms should be patentable at all. Physical/Mechanical/Chemical Processes are not my domain, and I don't have an opinion on those kinds of patents. But patents should not apply to purely intellectual disciplines like CS/mathematics/philosophy. The term "invention" is a stretch anyways.
"A lot of this view seems to me based in the belief that software patents are not generally innovative and hence worthy of payment;"
But I can be paid for my work without a patent monopoly. We are still the majority in fact.
"The problem, IMO, is large volumes of low value patents (intellectually), such as (ahem) XML editing."
It is a problem, but I still want to know where is the public benefit that justifies handing out private monopolies on software ideas?