| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
That's not how patents workThat's not how patents workPosted May 14, 2007 12:42 UTC (Mon) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091)In reply to: That's not how patents work by NigelK Parent article: Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN) Which questions? Ciaran is right, nobody will question the patent system because of that. Remember Elisha Gray? The poor guy got to the patent office with his telephone invention just hours after Bell had patented the same thing. That does not make the patent any more obvious or the process any more flawed.
(Log in to post comments)
That's not how patents work Posted May 14, 2007 16:34 UTC (Mon) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] It does make sense that two guys can independently and simultaneously invent something. But when some "invention" is done in passing and second "independent inventor" does not even realize it's "invention"... this cast the doubt on the quality of said patent. Big time. It does not mean that the patent if bogus, but it certainly looks strange... After all patent must be novel and non-obvious. If someone invented the thing and not even realized that it's worth something... how can it be non-obvious ? Are all Linux developers geniuses ?
That's not how patents work Posted May 14, 2007 16:45 UTC (Mon) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] Good point. However, I'm not sure the argument would fly too far before it is shot down... After all, Linux developers (Torvalds, famously) are known for being geniuses, releasing code freely, ideologically being against software patents, supporting copyleft, and being raving communists... erm, this last part is bogus ;)In short, GNU/Linux developers (kernel+userspace) will be pictured as giving their work away and being against the holy Intellectual Property trinity (copyright, patents and trade marks), even if it is not exactly true. So nobody will be surprised that they do not patent their inventions.
|
|
||||||||||||