Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 25th Mar 2012 19:44 UTC
Legal "Last week a large, profitable company sued a small start-up business for patent infringement. As a non-legal person, I can only guess that this sort of thing must happen fairly often. I would also guess that the large companies, which have the means to hire crackerjack legal teams and drag cases out, must often win. And while I guess I feel bad for the small businesses, I've never really cared before now. Because this time, the stakes are high. This time, it's my daughter's voice on the line. Literally." Infuriating. Maybe these are the kinds of stories we need to get normal people to care enough to force lawmakers to change. Sadly, the big bags of money from Apple, Microsoft, and Oracle are probably far more important to them than this sad story.
Thread beginning with comment 511847
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Sun 25th Mar 2012 20:12 UTC
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

Those who are software patent aggressors don't care about people. They usually don't care about anything except their purse to be precise. So this isn't surprising. Same story with drug patents. Those who abuse them care not about sick and those who could benefit from cheaper drugs.

Edited 2012-03-25 20:12 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by shmerl
by kragil on Sun 25th Mar 2012 20:52 in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

Exactly, so the only thing one can realistcally do is to not buy their shit(politics can be bought and therefor don't work). Everybody who complains about software patents and then goes out and buys Iphones, Ipads, Oracle, Windows, Xbox or Office is a hypocrite PERIOD

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Sun 25th Mar 2012 22:21 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

Agreed, vote with your wallet.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by Gullible Jones on Sun 25th Mar 2012 23:10 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
Gullible Jones Member since:
2006-05-23

Some people depend on drugs that happen to be patented. And like it or not, there are cases where the only drugs that work... are patented.

What do you expect people to do when they're tied into the system like that?

(And if you're just talking software, surely you realize that certain irreplaceable special-purpose software is covered by patents, right? Some people's jobs and/or educations depend on using this "shit.")

There is plenty of room for hypocrisy; but please recognize that being able to "put your money where your mouth is" is, simply put, a privilege of those who have money. (Or good health, or certain job-related skills, etc.)

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by Wafflez on Mon 26th Mar 2012 15:21 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
Wafflez Member since:
2011-06-26

Agree. Got an xBox, three Windows PCs, Windows Phone and I don't give a f--k about software patents. I care only about my comfort while dealing with technology. ^^

All others that are on the same boat and complain - YOU HYPOCRITES!!

Edited 2012-03-26 15:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by danger_nakamura on Tue 27th Mar 2012 17:47 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
danger_nakamura Member since:
2011-06-21

Exactly, so the only thing one can realistcally do is to not buy their shit(politics can be bought and therefor don't work). Everybody who complains about software patents and then goes out and buys Iphones, Ipads, Oracle, Windows, Xbox or Office is a hypocrite PERIOD


I agree that this is the honorable thing to do, and that it may have some impact in some cases.

I disagree that it is the ONLY thing to do. Some people say that talk is cheap, but I don't agree. Talk helps to keep issues visible.

Having once observed first hand (on a small scale) a phenomenon play out in real life, I will tell you what can happen if people keep talking about an issue. Maybe someone that would otherwise remain ignorant becomes educated and convinced. And maybe this someone is the nephew of someone important in the industry. And maybe this someone has to hear from his nephew over Thanksgiving dinner that he is being a DICKHEAD and is wrong. And then maybe something will change.

I'll concede that this is a dramatic example, although I did watch it happen in the relatively smaller fishbowl of local politics. The larger point is that dialog is important. It is not merely complaining - even though some people clearly are just complainers. Keeping an issue at the forefront has value, and if its all that someone feels able to do than I say at least they are doing that.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Comment by shmerl
by marcus0263 on Sun 25th Mar 2012 21:09 in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
marcus0263 Member since:
2007-06-02

Those who are software patent aggressors don't care about people. They usually don't care about anything except their purse to be precise. So this isn't surprising. Same story with drug patents. Those who abuse them care not about sick and those who could benefit from cheaper drugs.


Problem is the obscene amount of money it takes to bring a drug to market. There are also a large amount of drugs that do "not" get FDA approval and literally millions of $$$$ go down the tube. Once a drug company does get approval they have only something like 7 or 10 years to recoup the investment then the Generic's then start puking them out. I take issue with the company's who have invested nothing in the drug and are only in it for profit.

For the record I do "not" work for any Pharm or Medical but where I work there is a small drug company. Which BTW have invested millions in a drug over the last 8 years or so and are trying to bring it to market. It opened my eyes .........

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by cyrilleberger on Mon 26th Mar 2012 06:22 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

Problem is the obscene amount of money it takes to bring a drug to market. There are also a large amount of drugs that do "not" get FDA approval and literally millions of $$$$ go down the tube. Once a drug company does get approval they have only something like 7 or 10 years to recoup the investment then the Generic's then start puking them out.


Yes but that is the problem with the way drugs are being researched and developed. There are two side effects to that, drugs companies pushes new medicine even if they don't have better effects, just because they get higher profit from their patented drugs, second side effect, dugs companies mostly invest in medicine in area with high profit (such as anti-depressor, weight losing...), for problems affecting wealthy people who can make afford to pay a lot of money on drugs, meaning western countries.

Research on new drugs should be public, paid by a tax on drugs sell, and companies should compete on their ability to lower the production cost.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by danger_nakamura on Tue 27th Mar 2012 17:32 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
danger_nakamura Member since:
2011-06-21

Problem is the obscene amount of money it takes to bring a drug to market. There are also a large amount of drugs that do "not" get FDA approval and literally millions of $$$$ go down the tube. Once a drug company does get approval they have only something like 7 or 10 years to recoup the investment then the Generic's then start puking them out.


Judging by the obscene profits that the pharmaceutical giants report year after year, I have to guess that the R&D sob story given by apologists for the industry is -ahem- overstated to an extent.

Pfizer 2011 earnings: 17.19 billion USD. Profits: 3.74 billion USD.

2008 salary of CEO of PhRMA, lobby for the industry: 4.48 million USD.

Somehow I don't think that food-on-the-table or recouping investments is a problem for people in this industry. In fact, I can't find (in an admittedly brief search) a single unprofitable year for any of the major innovators in the field. Could it be that they are overstating the problem a bit?

To me, it is the same old story:

PATENT DEFENDER: We just want to put food on our tables and recoup our investment.

ROUGH TRANSLATION: We want you to respect our right to make obscene amounts of money at the expense of society. "An honest living" isn't enough. We're superstars - where would you be without us. We want ALL of the money.

Is it any wonder that some of the people living in the larger society take offense to this position? Especially when we are all hit in the pocket to sustain this multi-billion dollar profit?

Reply Parent Score: 1