| |||||||||||||
Stolen productsStolen productsPosted Feb 24, 2012 23:13 UTC (Fri) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091)Parent article: If Android is a "stolen product," then so was the iPhone (ars technica) It never ceases to amaze me how laws continue to be made with complete disregard to the real facts: patents do not protect innovation and they probably never have. Strongest protections are just a dampening of innovation. Someone should tell legislators all around the world.
(Log in to post comments)
Stolen products Posted Feb 25, 2012 11:10 UTC (Sat) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]
I might get shot for this comment, but ... :-)
*DESIGN* patents aren't bad, when not abused ... (but isn't that true of most?). And I think Apple is mostly suing Samsung over design patents.
But when used properly, design patents are like trademarks, saying "don't copy my *artistic* work". Though how Apple can argue that an iPhone/Pad/Whatever looks like a Samsung Galaxy I don't know.
I have no argument whatsoever with design patents being used to crush copy-cats. But if the two products are clearly different, then any patent in-suit should be *CANCELLED*. Hey - that might be a good thing - if a plaintiff loses a lawsuit then the defendant can asked for the patent to be cancelled as a part-remedy! :-)
Cheers,
Stolen products Posted Feb 25, 2012 12:34 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] *DESIGN* patents aren't bad, when not abused ... Interesting. How can they promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts? Traditionally patents are justified as "disclosure in exchange to limited monopoly" - but with design patents there are no disclosure thus we are left with pure, distilled, unadulterated, evil side - with no upsides at all. But when used properly, design patents are like trademarks, saying "don't copy my *artistic* work". If the work is artistic enough the you should use trademarks to protect it. Patents are not needed. If it's functional, then it should not be protected at all. Imagine a world where each car has it's own "artistic" controls.
Stolen products Posted Feb 25, 2012 14:24 UTC (Sat) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] Patents do not in principle cover designs; they are meant to protect processes. That is: the invention and not the end result. According to the European Patent Convention:The following in particular shall not be regarded as inventions within the meaning of paragraph 1:For artistic designs you have copyright: the right for others to copy your original design. But there is a deeper question: what particular benefit to society do you have in mind? In my mind, the ability for others to copy an original design (without paying royalties, of course) are an incentive for the innovator. Why would I bother to innovate if no one else can copy my design? In contrast, if others are chasing my design, then I will try to improve it further and further so that they cannot get to me. Patents are a line in the sand: do not cross this line or I will sue you. Even if in the end there is no value in the patent, it is enough to distract competitors for a while. Is that what we want? Not to cite Jobs talking about "going thermonuclear": "I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong," Jobs said. "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this."Rackets are bad enough, but shutting down competitors is the last thing that the public might want, ever.
Stolen products Posted Feb 25, 2012 20:29 UTC (Sat) by andrel (subscriber, #5166) [Link] Under US law designs are patentable.
Stolen products Posted Feb 27, 2012 11:12 UTC (Mon) by drago01 (subscriber, #50715) [Link]
US (patent) law is completely broken.
|
|||||||||||||