Posted on 07/31/2005 4:08:56 PM PDT by rdb3
stuff like this ought to be like a multimedia automatic spell-checker event.
"telling its customers who may be tempted to switch to open-source alternatives to think twice before leaving Microsoft's protective awning."
Ok then. LOL!
I didn't know you could ger patents for clumsy, obfuscating and buggy software.
Why Bill Gates wants 3,000 new patents
So he can dance around naked while shouting that he's accumulated more money during his lifetime than anybody else in the history of the world?
You win, Bill.
Bill? Bill? Oh, right, I forgot that immortality isn't yet for sale. My mistake.
The HP Officjet 7410 is a train-wreck of problems on the software.
The patent system in the country needs serious reform.
What's the difference between patenting software and patenting recipes, blueprints, chemical formulas, or anything else? They're all the same thing. Sure, you run into the risk of getting a very broad algorithm approved, but the same risk applies for all other categories (such as the wheel). There's nothing special about software that should make it immune from copyrighting.
What's the difference between patenting software and patenting recipes, blueprints, chemical formulas, or anything else? They're all the same thing. Sure, you run into the risk of getting a very broad algorithm approved, but the same risk applies for all other categories (such as the wheel). There's nothing special about software that should make it immune from copyrighting.
That is why software patents are a bad idea. Copyright is the correct form of protection.
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"
Intellectual property laws should be about promoting progress and to make sure that authors and inventors have the opportunity to be compensated for their work. It shouldn't be about providing an eternal source of income for the inventor and their progeny, destroying competition, or stifling progress. Capitalism without competition has many of the problems of socialism because many of the problems of socialism are caused by the lack of competition.
You're right and I agree. I'm not sure why I added the word "software".
LOL. There were times I caught myself SCREAMING at one of my Canon printers once (or twice) and picking it up and shaking it and slamming into my desk when no combination of commands, instructions, aborts or keys (even the "Any" key) would not stop it from spewing out endless copies.
The patent system in this country needs major overhaul. Although the existence of computer games played on a CRT should not have blocked Mr. Baer from receiving a patent on his home video game console and enforcing it against Atari and other makers of "pong"-style machines, such patent should not have been enforceable against microprocessor-based video game systems, since the use of computers to play games predated Mr. Baer's inventions even if the use of discrete circuitry did not.
I don't really see how patents promote technological development. Seems to me that they just make lawyers rich and allow big corporations to threaten the little guy or allow parking lot corporations and lawyers to persecute others. Apart from that, patents enrich the government and the applicant at the expense of everyone else.
Dude crash and reboot.
Unplug and reboot.
Empty printer casche/que.
Perform hardware uninstall reinstall.
But smashing it against the wall or shooting it with a shotgun will not solve your problem.
I have nothing against software patents (have several), my beef is with the USPTO granting patents for obvious things. What ends up happening is that large companies can knock out smaller ones simply by starting legal action. No attorney will defend a small company against infringement claims. They will happily attack a larger company for infringement of a smaller company's patent in exchange for part ownership (assuming there are mucho $$$ on the horizon).
Defending yourself against a larger company is extremely expensive. A patent infringement defense is $50,000-100,000, with no guarantee of winning. The only real defense is to patent your own algorithms and use them as bargaining chips if attacked. Attorneys charge $8,000-15,000 for a technical patent.
You have to be crazy these days to want to start your own business. I started a microscopic software company in a field that I later discovered was heavily patented. What an expensive mistake.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.