Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Popman
The core problem here as I see it is the problems with assigning many tech patents while not acknowledging prior art.

So Apple applies for and receives a patent for something that has been done for years by several parties, that art is something fundamental towards graphic interfaces, and then Apple turns around and uses that patent to try and force competitors off the playing field.

Similar problems exist with genetic technology patents. The patent examiners often just don't understand what is novel and what is prior art and grant patents that are just too sweeping - the patent ends up ecompassing what is novel AND the prior art used to create what is novel in the application.

11 posted on 12/03/2011 4:52:28 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: dirtboy
Really a question rather than an argument,but based on that logic, how does every advance in the car industry like engine design that is based off a previous patents not get challenged.

A internal combustion engine from 1950 is after all still an internal combustion engine from 2011 minus all the bells and whistles

I think apple needs to figure out smart phones are as common or even more so than cars and unless they come up with something completely new and radical....these lawsuits seem more like corporate fishing expedition looking for legal precedent to protect their profits

16 posted on 12/03/2011 5:07:32 AM PST by Popman (Obama is God's curse upon the land....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson