Posted Jul 12, 2004 17:48 UTC (Mon) by newren (subscriber, #5160)
[Link]
Of course they do. They know how to approve patent applications that shouldn't be approved.
Oracle patents content management systems
Posted Jul 12, 2004 18:48 UTC (Mon) by marduk (subscriber, #3831)
[Link]
I hear they're very knowledgeable people and know how to do their jobs. The problem, I think, granting patents is their business and business is good.
Oracle patents content management systems
Posted Jul 13, 2004 5:12 UTC (Tue) by darkpink (guest, #19896)
[Link]
This is precisely the state of affairs. In fact, they brag about their profits. It's all about the cash. In my opinion, that's gotta be a philosphy that trickles down from the people in charge over there.
Wouldn't it be great if there was some sort of penalty for an employee at the patent office who granted a patent that was successfully invalidated?
For some reason I'm reminded of a passage from the bible: "Forgive them, for they know not what they do."
I can't forgive this, but then again I'm not the almighty JC.
*WTF* !?!?!
Oracle patents content management systems
Posted Jul 13, 2004 10:04 UTC (Tue) by jeroen (subscriber, #12372)
[Link]
There is actually penalty, rejecting patents has a penalty. It involves a lot more work, because they have to write down why they rejected it, etc. Granting patents is a lot easier. At least this is how the EPO works, but I suspect the USPTO doesn't work a lot differently.
Oracle patents content management systems
Posted Dec 15, 2004 20:07 UTC (Wed) by WMartin (guest, #26700)
[Link]
I use to work at the USPTO and know they wouldn't have known what they were reading. I'm very shocked that it did receive a patent since they would have to consider all of the other CMFs out there. But with all laws there are loop holes. My biggest question is what Oracle hopes to gain when their system mirrors Zope/Plone and everyone else? *Zope Rules!!*