I'm not prepared to admit it? Did you read what I said? My original post wasn't meant as an expert opinion or claiming professional knowledge. It was an opinion, which last time I checked I'm allowed have. For someone who claims he knows nothing about it either, you take it a little too seriously.
You act like whenever someone gives an opinion, they're also claiming to be an expert
No, I take these opinions for what they are worth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
The difference is that you are the only one that seems to care. AI forums is a great place to spout off and I think most people frequenting these forums have the wherewithal to detect when posts are based upon factual knowledge of the matter discussed (rare) or are... well, just opinionated spouting off (common).
Could be I am the only one who cares, but I doubt it. I'm just making an observation about how these threads tend to go.
One of the biggest points of a patent is to try to pertain to as much as possible. They are supposed to be vague to a point to allow for implementation of said patent that isn't known at the time of filing.
I'm not a patent lawyer, I just know you want your patent to cover as much ground as possible. I know this because I've got patents.
I'm not a patent attorney and neither are you (family relations don't count, sorry). Thus neither of us have anything like the expertise required to come to any educated conclusions. The difference between you and me, apparently, is that I'm prepared to admit it. I haven't got a clue about the validity of the patent or the suit. So far in the many, many similar discussions I've seen here, nobody really does -- which doesn't stop them from spouting off.
I'm willing to bet that few, if any, of us are experienced mobile hardware designers, either. And yet that doesn't stop us debating why Apple didn't include a camera in the latest iPod touch revisions.
My point is, what's your point? Why is "spouting off" on this topic any worse the spouting off on any other? Welcome to the Internet! Smoke 'em if you got 'em!
I'm willing to bet that few, if any, of us are experienced mobile hardware designers, either. And yet that doesn't stop us debating why Apple didn't include a camera in the latest iPod touch revisions.
My point is, what's your point? Why is "spouting off" on this topic any worse the spouting off on any other? Welcome to the Internet! Smoke 'em if you got 'em!
I've been known to make similar observations in threads on other subjects -- so no, it may not be any worse, but it's certainly not any better.
Randomized keys are a part of classic cryptographic methods. Even the Enigma Machine used them back at the start of the 1900s. They were probably before that. It's a painfully obvious requirement. Personally, I think the USPTO should (a) remove any patent owned by and (b) permanently disqualify from filing for another patent the principals involved with any patent that is proven at least once to be invalid for whatever reason. In this case, certainly prior art applies. (If the principals were truly ignorant of the prior art, maybe they get ONE break ... but after that NO MORE PATENTS FOR YOU!)
The first post in each of these threads should be, "The following people know nothing about the patents involved or the law, but have strong opinions about them nonetheless."
I'm not a patent attorney and neither are you (family relations don't count, sorry). Thus neither of us have anything like the expertise required to come to any educated conclusions. The difference between you and me, apparently, is that I'm prepared to admit it. I haven't got a clue about the validity of the patent or the suit. So far in the many, many similar discussions I've seen here, nobody really does -- which doesn't stop them from spouting off.
No, I take these opinions for what they are worth.
Could be I am the only one who cares, but I doubt it. I'm just making an observation about how these threads tend to go.
I think you're spot on. Current internet usage promotes instant gratification by allowing one to spout any and every unfettered thought rambling through one's head. Tweet. Tweet.
[case in point]
The value of contributing commentary, ideas, and experience, is vastly different from those who speculatively pontificate with certitude, delivered with an irrational sense of its value beyond the originator, with derision to those holding opposing views. It is a narcissistic behavior that seems to be on the upswing in society.
Some use more discretion than others (at least, that's what it says on my soapbox teleprompter).
So before making assumptions on what me (or anyone else) knows, I'd keep my snide comments to myself.
No offense, but you have a college degree and you write like that? You may or may not know much about patent law and/or 'the industry', but you definitely have crappy grammar. (At least in this case.)
The other irksome thing is the complete lack of timeliness. Did these guys just wake up last week and realize that the biggest names in ecommerce have been using these technique that they think is covered by their patent? No, of course not, they game the system to maximize the payout (if there is one).
Suppose I see you walk across my lawn each morning on the way to school, starting the first day of the school year, and never say anything. Then at the end of the school year I sued you for the cost of having my lawn reseeded thanks to the damage you caused. The small-claims judge would, I hope, tell me to piss off since I took no reasonable steps to prevent the damage (by telling you not to walk on the lawn 9 months earlier).
Same thing with this case. Somehow it shouldn't be in the interest of the patent holder to sit silently by while their patent is (allegedly) being violated. If you know that someone is violating your patent and you don't object promptly then you shouldn't be able to sue for damages occuring after that date.
I agree. Having something like that in the law would shut down a lot of this obscure patent fishing. Also while we hear the initial cases we don't hear about the appeals (if there were any) and if the case was later reversed.
No offense, but you have a college degree and you write like that? You may or may not know much about patent law and/or 'the industry', but you definitely have crappy grammar. (At least in this case.)
Picky picky. Just because I graduated doesn't mean I aced my english classes
For the record, my father-in-law is a patent attorney at the largest IP law firm in the Midwest. While not knowing anything specifically about patent law, I understand the industry (for lack of better word) and how things work. For one, filing in the Eastern District of Texas usually says something, unless they're miraculously located there. And having a college education, I'm able to look up and read a patent and comprehend it.
So before making assumptions on what me (or anyone else) knows, I'd keep my snide comments to myself.
my neighbour, whom I rarely speak but overheard him while on the phone, once travelled with a patient lawyer. they did not talk, but shared some knowledge over the air as they smelled each other. also got a college degree, i mean two. can I also share my opinion about patients in these forums?
my neighbour, whom I rarely speak but overheard him while on the phone, once travelled with a patient lawyer. they did not talk, but shared some knowledge over the air as they smelled each other. also got a college degree, i mean two. can I also share my opinion about patients in these forums?
I don't think a doctor would have any patience for patient's patent opinions; a patently patient patent lawyer might. (Please use an British accent when reading this!)*
* Other accents are equally valid, but may not give the results desired by this post.
So you say, but I think the next poster got it right:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CurtisEMayle
I think you're spot on. Current internet usage promotes instant gratification by allowing one to spout any and every unfettered thought rambling through one's head. Tweet. Tweet.
[case in point]
The value of contributing commentary, ideas, and experience, is vastly different from those who speculatively pontificate with certitude, delivered with an irrational sense of its value beyond the originator, with derision to those holding opposing views. It is a narcissistic behavior that seems to be on the upswing in society.
Quite so. A lot of people seem to get some sort of pleasure out of shadow-boxing. For me, I'd rather discuss issues with people who actually take things seriously and are doing more than just spouting off. You never know, you might even learn something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginja
I don't think a doctor would have any patience for patient's patent opinions; a patently patient patent lawyer might. (Please use an British accent when reading this!)*
* Other accents are equally valid, but may not give the results desired by this post.
The first post in each of these threads should be, "The following people know nothing about the patents involved or the law, but have strong opinions about them nonetheless."
Most patrons of this site are technically-savvy. If the patent claim seems dubious, people post opinions. So, when you don't have anything to add to the discussion, you criticize others because they do? Interesting.
Most patrons of this site are technically-savvy. If the patent claim seems dubious, people post opinions. So, when you don't have anything to add to the discussion, you criticize others because they do? Interesting.
When someone has something to say that's more than just an unfocused rant, I'll let you know. That will be interesting. And unusual.
Not again... How many people are gonna sue Apple for using small bits of their tech that could have been gotten by Apple through their own research. I say we put a limit on suing, so that only if the source code is 80% ripped off then you can sue. Just a suggestion...
IF Apple 'borrowed' technology from others they deserve to be punished.
the catch is that it has to be the tech. the days of being able to patent a vague idea are over.
and if the two companies happened to be working on the same thing at the same time and filed patents both of which were approved at the same time, it would be hard for anyone to say that Apple 'copied' anything.
Comments
I'm not prepared to admit it? Did you read what I said? My original post wasn't meant as an expert opinion or claiming professional knowledge. It was an opinion, which last time I checked I'm allowed have. For someone who claims he knows nothing about it either, you take it a little too seriously.
You act like whenever someone gives an opinion, they're also claiming to be an expert
No, I take these opinions for what they are worth.
The difference is that you are the only one that seems to care. AI forums is a great place to spout off and I think most people frequenting these forums have the wherewithal to detect when posts are based upon factual knowledge of the matter discussed (rare) or are... well, just opinionated spouting off (common).
Could be I am the only one who cares, but I doubt it. I'm just making an observation about how these threads tend to go.
I'm not a patent lawyer, I just know you want your patent to cover as much ground as possible. I know this because I've got patents.
Really? You first.
I'm not a patent attorney and neither are you (family relations don't count, sorry). Thus neither of us have anything like the expertise required to come to any educated conclusions. The difference between you and me, apparently, is that I'm prepared to admit it. I haven't got a clue about the validity of the patent or the suit. So far in the many, many similar discussions I've seen here, nobody really does -- which doesn't stop them from spouting off.
I'm willing to bet that few, if any, of us are experienced mobile hardware designers, either. And yet that doesn't stop us debating why Apple didn't include a camera in the latest iPod touch revisions.
My point is, what's your point? Why is "spouting off" on this topic any worse the spouting off on any other? Welcome to the Internet! Smoke 'em if you got 'em!
I'm willing to bet that few, if any, of us are experienced mobile hardware designers, either. And yet that doesn't stop us debating why Apple didn't include a camera in the latest iPod touch revisions.
My point is, what's your point? Why is "spouting off" on this topic any worse the spouting off on any other? Welcome to the Internet! Smoke 'em if you got 'em!
I've been known to make similar observations in threads on other subjects -- so no, it may not be any worse, but it's certainly not any better.
The first post in each of these threads should be, "The following people know nothing about the patents involved or the law, but have strong opinions about them nonetheless."
So, you're including yourself in that same group?
Really? You first.
I'm not a patent attorney and neither are you (family relations don't count, sorry). Thus neither of us have anything like the expertise required to come to any educated conclusions. The difference between you and me, apparently, is that I'm prepared to admit it. I haven't got a clue about the validity of the patent or the suit. So far in the many, many similar discussions I've seen here, nobody really does -- which doesn't stop them from spouting off.
The forums are here for spouting off.
No, I take these opinions for what they are worth.
Could be I am the only one who cares, but I doubt it. I'm just making an observation about how these threads tend to go.
I think you're spot on. Current internet usage promotes instant gratification by allowing one to spout any and every unfettered thought rambling through one's head. Tweet. Tweet.
[case in point]
The value of contributing commentary, ideas, and experience, is vastly different from those who speculatively pontificate with certitude, delivered with an irrational sense of its value beyond the originator, with derision to those holding opposing views. It is a narcissistic behavior that seems to be on the upswing in society.
Some use more discretion than others (at least, that's what it says on my soapbox teleprompter).
So before making assumptions on what me (or anyone else) knows, I'd keep my snide comments to myself.
No offense, but you have a college degree and you write like that? You may or may not know much about patent law and/or 'the industry', but you definitely have crappy grammar. (At least in this case.)
The other irksome thing is the complete lack of timeliness. Did these guys just wake up last week and realize that the biggest names in ecommerce have been using these technique that they think is covered by their patent? No, of course not, they game the system to maximize the payout (if there is one).
Suppose I see you walk across my lawn each morning on the way to school, starting the first day of the school year, and never say anything. Then at the end of the school year I sued you for the cost of having my lawn reseeded thanks to the damage you caused. The small-claims judge would, I hope, tell me to piss off since I took no reasonable steps to prevent the damage (by telling you not to walk on the lawn 9 months earlier).
Same thing with this case. Somehow it shouldn't be in the interest of the patent holder to sit silently by while their patent is (allegedly) being violated. If you know that someone is violating your patent and you don't object promptly then you shouldn't be able to sue for damages occuring after that date.
I agree. Having something like that in the law would shut down a lot of this obscure patent fishing. Also while we hear the initial cases we don't hear about the appeals (if there were any) and if the case was later reversed.
No offense, but you have a college degree and you write like that? You may or may not know much about patent law and/or 'the industry', but you definitely have crappy grammar. (At least in this case.)
Picky picky. Just because I graduated doesn't mean I aced my english classes
For the record, my father-in-law is a patent attorney at the largest IP law firm in the Midwest. While not knowing anything specifically about patent law, I understand the industry (for lack of better word) and how things work. For one, filing in the Eastern District of Texas usually says something, unless they're miraculously located there. And having a college education, I'm able to look up and read a patent and comprehend it.
So before making assumptions on what me (or anyone else) knows, I'd keep my snide comments to myself.
my neighbour, whom I rarely speak but overheard him while on the phone, once travelled with a patient lawyer. they did not talk, but shared some knowledge over the air as they smelled each other. also got a college degree, i mean two. can I also share my opinion about patients in these forums?
my neighbour, whom I rarely speak but overheard him while on the phone, once travelled with a patient lawyer. they did not talk, but shared some knowledge over the air as they smelled each other. also got a college degree, i mean two. can I also share my opinion about patients in these forums?
I don't think a doctor would have any patience for patient's patent opinions; a patently patient patent lawyer might. (Please use an British accent when reading this!)*
* Other accents are equally valid, but may not give the results desired by this post.
The forums are here for spouting off.
So you say, but I think the next poster got it right:
I think you're spot on. Current internet usage promotes instant gratification by allowing one to spout any and every unfettered thought rambling through one's head. Tweet. Tweet.
[case in point]
The value of contributing commentary, ideas, and experience, is vastly different from those who speculatively pontificate with certitude, delivered with an irrational sense of its value beyond the originator, with derision to those holding opposing views. It is a narcissistic behavior that seems to be on the upswing in society.
Quite so. A lot of people seem to get some sort of pleasure out of shadow-boxing. For me, I'd rather discuss issues with people who actually take things seriously and are doing more than just spouting off. You never know, you might even learn something.
I don't think a doctor would have any patience for patient's patent opinions; a patently patient patent lawyer might. (Please use an British accent when reading this!)*
* Other accents are equally valid, but may not give the results desired by this post.
Indubitably.
The first post in each of these threads should be, "The following people know nothing about the patents involved or the law, but have strong opinions about them nonetheless."
Most patrons of this site are technically-savvy. If the patent claim seems dubious, people post opinions. So, when you don't have anything to add to the discussion, you criticize others because they do? Interesting.
Most patrons of this site are technically-savvy. If the patent claim seems dubious, people post opinions. So, when you don't have anything to add to the discussion, you criticize others because they do? Interesting.
When someone has something to say that's more than just an unfocused rant, I'll let you know. That will be interesting. And unusual.
Not again...
IF Apple 'borrowed' technology from others they deserve to be punished.
the catch is that it has to be the tech. the days of being able to patent a vague idea are over.
and if the two companies happened to be working on the same thing at the same time and filed patents both of which were approved at the same time, it would be hard for anyone to say that Apple 'copied' anything.
not that they won't try.
When someone has something to say that's more than just an unfocused rant, I'll let you know. That will be interesting. And unusual.
It will be even more surprising if those comments were to come from you.