Re: Dotcom titan funds 'Mark Cuban Chair To Eliminate Stupid Patents'

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 25, 2012.

  1. Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 25, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Eric Stevens <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 15:10:56 +0100, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    >>Eric Stevens <> wrote:
    >>> Specially for Wolfgang :)


    >>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/20/eff_software_patent_reform_donation/


    >>Happily some forces are there that try to limit the damage
    >>done by overbroad intellectual property.


    > " .... the suggestion that software patents should last for no more
    > than five years, and that applicants must provide a running piece
    > of code to receive a patent for it, and that a commission should
    > investigate whether software patents have any economic benefit at
    > all. ®"


    > I suspect you will approve of the last part of the above.


    Obviously. I don't see anyone not approve. Unless they're
    fine with getting their money to the detriment of everyone
    else --- which is theft from everyone else.

    Oh, and I love the second part. Show that your invention works.
    Clearly teach anyone who uses the patent, either now (with
    licence fees) or after it's expired. That's the IDEA of a
    patent over a trade secret.

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 26, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Eric Stevens <> wrote:
    > On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 22:45:27 +0100, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    >>Eric Stevens <> wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 15:10:56 +0100, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    >>>>Eric Stevens <> wrote:
    >>>>> Specially for Wolfgang :)


    >>>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/20/eff_software_patent_reform_donation/


    >>>>Happily some forces are there that try to limit the damage
    >>>>done by overbroad intellectual property.


    >>> " .... the suggestion that software patents should last for no more
    >>> than five years, and that applicants must provide a running piece
    >>> of code to receive a patent for it, and that a commission should
    >>> investigate whether software patents have any economic benefit at
    >>> all. ®"


    >>> I suspect you will approve of the last part of the above.


    >>Obviously. I don't see anyone not approve. Unless they're
    >>fine with getting their money to the detriment of everyone
    >>else --- which is theft from everyone else.


    >>Oh, and I love the second part. Show that your invention works.
    >>Clearly teach anyone who uses the patent, either now (with
    >>licence fees) or after it's expired. That's the IDEA of a
    >>patent over a trade secret.


    > That's what is supposed to happen.


    The "supposed to happen" instead of "happening" clearly marks
    the difference between an ideal and the reality.

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Jan 10, 2013
    #3
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. kpg

    stupid stupid stupid

    kpg, Oct 26, 2004, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    830
    T-Bone
    Nov 26, 2004
  2. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    759
  3. Paul Ockenden

    Sipgate - 'Add funds'

    Paul Ockenden, Sep 11, 2005, in forum: UK VOIP
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    801
    Ivor Jones
    Sep 11, 2005
  4. RichA
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    484
    RichA
    Apr 11, 2012
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    190
    RichA
    Dec 27, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page