|
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
 Posted - 11/19/2004 : 20:41:10
|
A bunch of these guys seem to think so:
They talk about potential problems like:
quote:
The biggest problem is that patents are valid for 20 years. In a slow-paced industry, that may be acceptable. For computer software, that means anything which was considered a groundbreaking invention in the days of the Commodore 64 should still enjoy patent protection today. Even the greatest visionaries of the IT industry have never been able to predict the next 20 years. Just a 2-year horizon is a major challenge in the software market. However, the "patent mafia" claims that patent examiners were capable of deciding today what type of software concepts should be monopolized for 20 years to come. So much hubris is ridiculous and frightening at the same time.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
 Posted - 11/20/2004 : 06:02:33 [Permalink]
|
When solving an arithmetic (or other) problem, there are only so many solutions. If you as a programmer then chooses the solution that is the least complex, or the fastest to execute, any number of programmers will come up with the same solution. The only difference in the programming could possibly be the names of the variables used.
So BASIC programming like
10 PRINT "Hello"
20 GOTO 10
might be a patent violation, even without me ever knowing that the solution was patented already. That notion is ridiculous.
For the same reason, I think that copyright for the smilies used in the forum is ludicrous too. There are only so many ways to make a smiley. Even if it's animated.
I have collected a bunch of smilies, but I have no idea if they can be used on the forum. I'm not sure what the Admins think, but I'd use the smilies until someone claimed copyright for them, and demand we stop using them, or perhaps display credit.
Are we afraid of smiley-spies?
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
 |
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2004 : 08:22:21 [Permalink]
|
I think that's ridiculous.
How would that patent even be verified? |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2004 : 09:14:35 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
The smileys are cool. We should have more of them here at SFN!! |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2004 : 14:24:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
The smileys are cool. We should have more of them here at SFN!!
They are indeed cool. I raided several forums for smileys, but I was picky about it. There are 33 of them, and only a few of them are meant for the same "emotion". Some of them don't have transparent backgrounds, but such things can be fixed. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
way
New Member
USA
35 Posts |
Posted - 11/30/2004 : 12:27:57 [Permalink]
|
There needs to be something to protect original ideas in the software industry but the patent system as we have known it for how many decades is not the answer.
I've been writing and designing software systems for 20 years and have run afoul of a few patents. In the most recent cases we had documentation proving our implementation was unique or that we had coverage through a third-party vendor.
The most ridiculous one that I tripped over was about 16 years ago. Apparently, the flashing colon between the hours and minutes of a digital time display was patented by the first inventors of the original LCD watches that you had to press a button on to display the time. I had to use a non-flashing colon instead.  |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 11/30/2004 : 13:14:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by the_ignored
A bunch of these guys seem to think so:
They talk about potential problems like:
quote:
The biggest problem is that patents are valid for 20 years. In a slow-paced industry, that may be acceptable. For computer software, that means anything which was considered a groundbreaking invention in the days of the Commodore 64 should still enjoy patent protection today. Even the greatest visionaries of the IT industry have never been able to predict the next 20 years. Just a 2-year horizon is a major challenge in the software market. However, the "patent mafia" claims that patent examiners were capable of deciding today what type of software concepts should be monopolized for 20 years to come. So much hubris is ridiculous and frightening at the same time.
I don't think that using such concepts as exceedingly simple programs is patentable. What they tend to cover is the methodology of more complex programs such as those which run full blown patient appointment scheduling. In those, thousands of man hours are expended and the company (and in some companies, the individual programmer) deserves residulas for coming up with an original methodology. It would not be right for another company to buy a set of software (which in the medical community, you get the source code) and then modify it for sale as your own. Ditto for operating systems writers. (After all, OS'es are software at their heart.) |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 11/30/2004 : 13:26:41 [Permalink]
|
| Isn't it already prohibited to copy open source software and sell it? |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 11/30/2004 : 13:44:46 [Permalink]
|
Valiant Dancer wrote:quote:
I don't think that using such concepts as exceedingly simple programs is patentable. What they tend to cover is the methodology of more complex programs such as those which run full blown patient appointment scheduling.
Just 15 years ago, there were valid patents on such things as using the XOR operation to make a cursor blink on screen, and multiple scrolling windows of text. The problem back then was that patent examiners were not software people, and had little idea what was "obvious" and what was "unique."
Have things changed? I can't say, but I do know, thanks to the Scientific American "Staking Claims" column that patents on rather obvious non-software methods are still being granted, so I'm not sure that there's much hope. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 11/30/2004 : 14:45:36 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Valiant Dancer wrote:quote:
I don't think that using such concepts as exceedingly simple programs is patentable. What they tend to cover is the methodology of more complex programs such as those which run full blown patient appointment scheduling.
Just 15 years ago, there were valid patents on such things as using the XOR operation to make a cursor blink on screen, and multiple scrolling windows of text. The problem back then was that patent examiners were not software people, and had little idea what was "obvious" and what was "unique."
Have things changed? I can't say, but I do know, thanks to the Scientific American "Staking Claims" column that patents on rather obvious non-software methods are still being granted, so I'm not sure that there's much hope.
But based on this, couldn't patents be challenged due to being obvious? |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 11/30/2004 : 19:01:03 [Permalink]
|
| Yeah, they can be challenged, but that costs big bucks. Especially when you're on the receiving end of an infringement suit to begin with (otherwise, why challenge the validity of the patent?). |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
