To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
True enough. But with the fact that most of these cases get settled with cash, even the infamous Apple vs. Microsoft one, there doesn't seem to be any real concern that actual intellectual property is being violated, and the patent system wasn't invented just so corporations could make more money through lawsuits. All I want to know is when does this come into play:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abuse_of_process
Trying to find logic in the legal system are we?
Now who is is illogical
Yes, most of it is not concerned with real intellectual property protection. I think on a grander scale it is done to prevent the 'race to 0' of making everything a commodity.
On this point I am a little sympathetic.
Back in the ATT days, a lot of R&D was funded by the reality that the telecom companies had a monopoly on telecom service. It's easy to spend money on R&D with a guaranteed cash stream. This is the era where C++ was born.
Then came the idea that monopolies were bad and we needed to separate the R&D and equipment part from the service provision. Well that cut off the constant cash flow to the R&D, and over time these areas filled with competition and shareholders...
Combine this with globalization and it's even increased. Combine this again with open source and it's increased more. The result is how to keep any kind of cashflow to keep your company afloat. You use the final means you have... the legal system, Apple style supply chain hoarding... That's where we are now.
I'm not saying we should go back to monopoly, but I am sympathetic to the realities of running a business. This field moves so quickly and this become cheap and a commodity so fast, it's hard to keep any kind of stable business.





Member since:
2011-01-28
vitae,
The problem is that more and more patents are filed with the intent of being used as legal weapons to take down other developers rather than being used to recoup one's own development costs.
In some cases, it's clear that more effort went into writing, obscuring, and filing the patent than into actually developing the "invention".
It's ass-backwards, but lawyers love it and they run the country.