or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by ash471

  The first machine for transporting people that I can think of is a pole (which can be used as a pole vault).  Since poles have existed in nature before mankind existed, the best you could have hoped for is a method of using the pole.  If you lived 2,000 years ago and invented the chariot, you would not be able to write a claim to "a machine for transporting a person from one place to another,"  because the "pole" would anticipate your claim.  The first person to invent...
First of all, the NTP patents are not as broad as you suggest.  You are accusing NTP of claiming only the function.  That isn't true.  see wikipedia entry on NTP.     My personal belief is that the real reason everyone thinks the system is broken is because the dollar value in the RIM case is so high and it is hard to believe that in 1999 nobody had thought of originating the email on the mobile device.  As unbelievable as it may seem, it is true.  Nobody had done push...
It is true that software patents weren't being sought after in the early 80s.  However, that is because the electrical engineering field failed to see the value in software.  Today we think it is crazy that IBM allowed Microsoft and its team of nobodies to own the IBM operating system.  We now know that was a HUGE mistake and windfall for Bill Gates.  The software companies of the 80s didn't need patents because the industry didn't recognize the value in software, period....
Can someone on this forum give me an intelligent answer to the following question: Why should a patent holder be obligated to design a product or implement the invention?  Isn't it sufficient to create the "intellectual property".  Please consider the following example: if a miner finds a gold deposit and digs the raw ore out of the ground and sell it to a refiner, wouldn't you agree that the miner is entitled to compensation.  Note that the ore can't be used for...
Ha Ha, I see I set myself up for that one.  Do you have anything intelligent to say? Do you really think I wrote those posts because I like to see my name?  First, of all my name isn't associated with any of those posts.  Second of all, isn't it apparent to you that I am passionate about defending the patent system?  Let me help you out here.  My my purpose is to make people aware that this negative attitude towards the patent system risks killing the most valuable asset...
Again, the facts don't support your position.  When Google and Apple made smart phones in 2007-2008, they couldn't possibly have thought that these patents were garbage or had nothing to do with their phones.  How old were you in 2006?  Doesn't everyone remember the courts on the eve of shutting down RIM's Blackberry servers.  Why did Google and Apple implement this "garbage" into their phones knowing that RIM paid out more than half a billion dollars for having the...
One other thing....you say patents make products "prohibitively expensive".  That is easy to say and difficult to prove.  I could argue that the products wouldn't exist without the patent system because slavish copying would prevent anyone from breaking into any new market.  Take Apple for instance.  If Microsoft could make iPads, Apple would have had no incentive to make an iPad.  What would be the point of making it if Microsoft could sell it.  The only reason you can't...
If it costs "virtually nothing to do" why don't companies with billions of dollars just do it first.  The fact is, it doesn't cost "virtually nothing".  Patents cost about $20,0000 to obtain and maintain.  It usually takes a couple of patents to build a portfolio that can be defended.  This is the problem with the computer industry.....the facts don't support their position.  The computer industry rants about how patents are a problem but can't produce a cogent argument...
One last thing.  Do you realize that a company cannot apply for a patent in the US.  Only the inventor can apply for the patent.  The only way Apple or any other company a gets a US patent is by having an employee sign an agreement saying that they will assign the patent to the company.  How is NTP any different.  NTP paid the inventor for an assignment.  Do any of you really think that the patent laws should say, "you are only entitled to enforce a patent if you are an...
The patents relate to "push email" vs "pull".  Hopefully the settlement was for the value that customers place on "push" vs. "pull" email.  If the handset manufacturers don't want to pay for that value, they should just take out the "push" feature and go back to the old school email where you had to log into your email account and request your emails.  Everyone in this industry is so hipocritical. They act as though the patents cover a worthless feature, but when it comes...
New Posts  All Forums: