To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Ok, so again... where are the examples of these 'little guys' getting picked on by these large companies?
And I think that threat is a bit misguided. When it comes to terrorism (since you made the analogy), these large companies are like major metropolitan areas, while the small indie developers are like the folks who live in the back woods of Jerkwater, USA. If you're looking for the biggest target to hit, where are you going to aim? Plus, a lot of these companies (like Apple, MS, Google, etc.) have ecosystems that require the work of developers to survive, so are you gonna start suing the very people you need on your side to help run your business?
Only thing I'm saying is that when it comes to software patents, larger companies have a lot more to worry about than smaller ones do. The guy says that large companies have no interest in changing the system, but perhaps they will call a truce when they finally get tired of being sued by each other.
Edited 2011-07-14 22:17 UTC
NDA! My dear Watson. You will never hear of it.
You are naive, if you think they are spending their own money on the lawsuits. They will not get tired, ever.
Really? In any case of patent abuse, both the big companies AND the patent trolls are guilty. The fact that software is IN ANY WAY patentable is atrocious. There is no reason that ideas like an icon grid should be able to be patented. I personally find it deplorable that anyone can patent a software idea, which is already covered by copyright. I, for instance, am a songwriter by trade, and as such if somebody rips off my song, I can sue them. Nonetheless, I certainly have no right to patent the idea of a song about sorrow, love, etc... Why should coders have any more right than I do? Basically we're both writers. It's not that I don't see your point (standing up for the current system), but I don't see why on earth you would defend such a reprehensible practice at all, even if you're employed by a company that benefits from it.
"terrorism is not about killing people or making casualties. It's about scaring the crap out of your enemy."
Just today I read an article which was trying to make the point that the IRA made a lot more progress by not making casualties, but hitting financial centers like in London.
While fear might sound like a good idea to a potential terrorist, it turns out it isn't the way to get to your goal.
Anyway... waaaay off topic




Member since:
2005-06-29
The fact that this wasn't a reference to Lodsys?
It's the threat that counts. To take this way over the top - terrorism is not about killing people or making casualties. It's about scaring the crap out of your enemy.