I think this is proof that the patent system needs overhauled. No one should be granted vague general patents on mere concepts. There should be specific patents and only obtainable by having working prototypes, using valid technological advancement to accomplish the task. At this rate, the court systems will be in gridlock in a few years, just because of patent claims.
They're certainly an easy target, but no... They're just following the rules as they were handed down to them. It's certainly not in their power to dismiss something indiscriminately (except for perpetual motion patents --- those are weeded out to the best of their ability)...
Why? Well you know (grabbing my tinfoil hat)... its a big government conspiracy and 'big oil' is at the heart of it all...
I'm trying to figure out why you're still posting on this subject, when it was pointed out earlier that you have no idea what you're talking about?
What rich irony. The guy becomes a billionaire off a company that has knocked-off just about everything it does for its living, and he sues over something as trivial and meaningless as this?!
He needs money to go Yankees on his Seattle Seahawks and buy himself a Super Bowl..
Best team money can buy.
Yeah, he also needs to put some serious dollars in the Trail Blazers.
But, oh wait, he did.....
Then he proceeded to fire the GM that was actually making it all work. Nice!
Perhaps the oddly funny (to me at least) situation with Allen is his Charter fiasco. The guy plops an estimated $7 billion into Charter in an effort to take on Comcast, only to have Microsoft step in behind him and bolster their own holdings in Comcast, making it very difficult for Charter to survive.
When are software patents just going to die? Honestly, this is the biggest load of innovation stifling nonsense I have ever heard. All these big companies are just building up their arsenals of incredibly obvious patents so in the end, no one will be able to do anything without their go ahead.
I am in no way saying that Apple is immune to this - in fact, Apple is one of the biggest criminals in this whole scam. We saw it just the other day with the patent that was blatently copying the Where To? app.
All these big companies are building up their arsenals and getting ready for a fight. At the moment, the only guys I can see left standing at the end are in fact these big guys. I sincerely hope the people in charge of the US system step in an stop this before it truly stifles innovation.
At least this type of thing is not legal in Europe, and there is a chance that innovation will thrive there, the US will see it and stop this nonsense.
They're certainly an easy target, but no... They're just following the rules as they were handed down to them. It's certainly not in their power to dismiss something indiscriminately (except for perpetual motion patents --- those are weeded out to the best of their ability)...
Why? Well you know (grabbing my tinfoil hat)... its a big government conspiracy and 'big oil' is at the heart of it all...
Explain to me why perpetual motion patents can't be accepted?
Proposals for such inoperable machines have become so common that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has made an official policy of refusing to grant patents for perpetual motion machines without a working model. The USPTO Manual of Patent Examining Practice states:
With the exception of cases involving perpetual motion, a model is not ordinarily required by the Office to demonstrate the operability of a device. If operability of a device is questioned, the applicant must establish it to the satisfaction of the examiner, but he or she may choose his or her own way of so doing.
And, further, that:
A rejection of a patent application on the ground of lack of utility includes the more specific grounds of inoperativeness, involving perpetual motion. A rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 for lack of utility should not be based on grounds that the invention is frivolous, fraudulent or against public policy.
Paul may be afraid many people forgets him as the co-founder of Microsoft
No, money is the issue. Allen hasn't had any real big business successes lately and his pro sports teams aren't drawing like they used to. You don't sue on ideas from a small scale business that's only real income was on licensing a patent portfolio unless you are intending on making big bucks.
He's actually donated more money to philanthropic causes than you'll make in 100 lifetimes.
Money isn't the issue here.
Of course it's the issue. I don't know about you, but I don't know anyone who admits to having too much money, and pretty much everyone always wants more.
But, I guess this is what ex microsofties do when they no longer have any ideas.
But then suing Google, eBay, Apple, a bunch of big giants at the same time is not a smart move. Why don't pick one that you likely will win and sue the other companies after you win.
Also why don't Paul file the suit in East Texas if he wants to have more chance to win
Maybe you are illuminating why his post MS businesses haven't seen anywhere near the success of MS.
Comments
Drives me fucking crazy!!!
They're certainly an easy target, but no... They're just following the rules as they were handed down to them. It's certainly not in their power to dismiss something indiscriminately (except for perpetual motion patents --- those are weeded out to the best of their ability)...
Why? Well you know (grabbing my tinfoil hat)... its a big government conspiracy and 'big oil' is at the heart of it all...
I'm trying to figure out why you're still posting on this subject, when it was pointed out earlier that you have no idea what you're talking about?
He probably ran out of money, thus he needs more. Here we are today.
He's actually donated more money to philanthropic causes than you'll make in 100 lifetimes.
Money isn't the issue here.
He needs money to go Yankees on his Seattle Seahawks and buy himself a Super Bowl..
Best team money can buy.
Yeah, he also needs to put some serious dollars in the Trail Blazers.
But, oh wait, he did.....
Then he proceeded to fire the GM that was actually making it all work. Nice!
Perhaps the oddly funny (to me at least) situation with Allen is his Charter fiasco. The guy plops an estimated $7 billion into Charter in an effort to take on Comcast, only to have Microsoft step in behind him and bolster their own holdings in Comcast, making it very difficult for Charter to survive.
When are software patents just going to die? Honestly, this is the biggest load of innovation stifling nonsense I have ever heard. All these big companies are just building up their arsenals of incredibly obvious patents so in the end, no one will be able to do anything without their go ahead.
Yep:
Apple sues HTC for infringing 20 iPhone patents
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/02/a...phone-patents/
Apple Files New Trade Complaint With Against Nokia
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aOUohioz.WXc
Apple Sues Eastman Kodak for Patent Infringement
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patentl...ringement.html
All these big companies are building up their arsenals and getting ready for a fight. At the moment, the only guys I can see left standing at the end are in fact these big guys. I sincerely hope the people in charge of the US system step in an stop this before it truly stifles innovation.
At least this type of thing is not legal in Europe, and there is a chance that innovation will thrive there, the US will see it and stop this nonsense.
They're certainly an easy target, but no... They're just following the rules as they were handed down to them. It's certainly not in their power to dismiss something indiscriminately (except for perpetual motion patents --- those are weeded out to the best of their ability)...
Why? Well you know (grabbing my tinfoil hat)... its a big government conspiracy and 'big oil' is at the heart of it all...
Explain to me why perpetual motion patents can't be accepted?
Besides Nokia is claiming ownership of WiFi.
Yep:
Apple sues HTC for infringing 20 iPhone patents
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/02/a...phone-patents/
Apple Files New Trade Complaint With Against Nokia
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aOUohioz.WXc
Apple Sues Eastman Kodak for Patent Infringement
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patentl...ringement.html
Explain to me why perpetual motion patents can't be accepted?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion#Patents
Patents
Proposals for such inoperable machines have become so common that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has made an official policy of refusing to grant patents for perpetual motion machines without a working model. The USPTO Manual of Patent Examining Practice states:
With the exception of cases involving perpetual motion, a model is not ordinarily required by the Office to demonstrate the operability of a device. If operability of a device is questioned, the applicant must establish it to the satisfaction of the examiner, but he or she may choose his or her own way of so doing.
And, further, that:
A rejection of a patent application on the ground of lack of utility includes the more specific grounds of inoperativeness, involving perpetual motion. A rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 for lack of utility should not be based on grounds that the invention is frivolous, fraudulent or against public policy.
I agree. Money is not an issue. It's ego.
Paul may be afraid many people forgets him as the co-founder of Microsoft
No, money is the issue. Allen hasn't had any real big business successes lately and his pro sports teams aren't drawing like they used to. You don't sue on ideas from a small scale business that's only real income was on licensing a patent portfolio unless you are intending on making big bucks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion#Patents
But what if someone makes a perpetual machine that actually DOES work? Does that mean they will forever be unable to get a patent for that machine?
He's actually donated more money to philanthropic causes than you'll make in 100 lifetimes.
Money isn't the issue here.
Of course it's the issue. I don't know about you, but I don't know anyone who admits to having too much money, and pretty much everyone always wants more.
But, I guess this is what ex microsofties do when they no longer have any ideas.
But then suing Google, eBay, Apple, a bunch of big giants at the same time is not a smart move. Why don't pick one that you likely will win and sue the other companies after you win.
Also why don't Paul file the suit in East Texas if he wants to have more chance to win
Maybe you are illuminating why his post MS businesses haven't seen anywhere near the success of MS.