No, the Nazi comment is dead on. The Nazi's did not "shoot people on sight", they blindly followed their leaders orders without moral judgement. This is exactly the behavior you are recomending. I guess, in your eyes, the minute you become a law enforcement agent you sign away your right to have your own ethics and morals.
I'd love to know what kind of IP you create from "scratch." I think that point can easily be debunked. If you look around this site, you will find many IP producers (myself included) who take Mike's side. The fact that you fear dissent and discussion shows that you don't believe in the basic precepts of a free society. If your point is so strong, make it through dialog, not by stifling those with opposing views. Its all about that "freedom of speech" thingy.
Re: Patents are about novelty & nonobviousness - value
Wes - "look and feel" is not a patent. And Apple lost every suit. RSA was granted in 1977, but was never used in court (at least according to Wikkipedia - do you have other info?) Just because the USPTO grants a patent does not mean its valid, as can be seen throughout this site.
Wow, your last statement really sent my mind reeling... All the money and effort that the entertainment industry is spending "fighting piracy" could easily put mechanisms in place to allow a government to track and filter information at will. The entertainment industry could be buying their own golden muzzle. All it would take is an administration base enough to ignore the basic precepts of a free society. (cough...cough...Bush...cough...cough)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What techies think is irrelevant
Oh, I'm sorry, can you please name the major software developer that sued for patent violation prior to the UniSys Gif debacle?
Patents on dos... linking to a "software patent" page where the patents include physical devices... I hope you're not trying to become a trial attorney. Your arguments don't hold water.
Nice sidestep of the copyright issue, investor issue, and lack of innovation issue. Maybe you'll win a case yet!
Oddly, the software sector did just fine for a good 20+ years without software patents, thank-you-very-much. That was the climate that allowed Microsoft and Apple to thrive, and allowed IBM to fall. We had this thing called a "copyright", which meant people couldn't copy our programs without our consent. If you wanted to invest the time and effort to make one like it, go ahead, that was your time and money in development. There was no protectionist "patent" that would stop anyone. It wasn't until the late 90's that UniSys pulled its "gif patent" garbage, and its all been downhill from there.
To put it another way: had software patents been available, there would be no Excel or Lotus spreadsheets, it would all be VisiCalc. There would be no Word or Word Perfect, it would all be WordStar. The list goes on and on, with no one having the need to improve or innovate because they have cornered the market via patent.
Deal with it: angel investors, venture capital, servers, snacks and caffeinated drinks all came before software patents were considered viable, and would easily survive their demise. The only thing that would be eliminated is IP patent lawyers.
Wow, you're absolutely right! There's no such thing as open source software, or single-man shops, or hobby-software. And even if there was, no one could make money from such a venture. I mean, look at Microsoft and Apple! Were they one- or two-man shops?
What matters is what the lawyers think, because they are the ones who get things done! Do you think we'd have electricity without lawyers? Or the corporations that fund the lawyers? Lawyers are the only ones to gain or lose anything by the elimination of software patents, and what would we do without lawyers?
So just leave yer mitts off them thar patents, if ya know what's good fer ya!
Re: I guess none of you read the actual patent.....
Yeah, we got that. Put an Rtrim and Ltrim in a trigger on add/update, and you no longer have to worry about it in the rest of your code. Adding the same functionality directly to the database code and calling it "novel" is nothing less than fraudulent, IMHO.
Doesn't a professional in the field have to certify that the invention is novel? And if he certifies something that is obviously NOT novel, isn't that perjury?
And if it IS perjury, and the individual IS prosecuted, wouldn't the fear generated cut down on the USPTO's workload?
Stripping out e-mail would be trivial, but worthless. What you want to do is replace them with e-mail addresses of the rich and influential, ie: senators sons, presidents daughters, Mojo Nixon, etc. Once enough of them get a feel of the shaft, we'll finally see a change in the world.
Viacom should take a hike. They had large black banners warning of this all day long. And we use satellite! It's not enough that Noggin repeats the same 5 episodes of each show all week long, (my daughter's two, that's why I know) but the annoy ALL their customers with this stupid banner! Now I'm shopping for educational DVDs, 'cause she has all the Noggin shows memorized. Viacom needs better programming and better management, not higher prices.
This was a terrible bit of "research." 28 pages of padding and 2 pages to say, "context switching is bad. Don't do it." Yes, we already know multi-tasking doesn't really work. And pick up any book on software development, and one of the primary subjects is, "Don't distract your workers." Microsoft even went so far as to give each coder their own office!
And since when is this "information overload"? Information overload is more information than you can process, and has nothing to do with distractions. This is context-switching, plain and simple. Oh, darn, is context-switching not a buzzword?
Re: why intellectual property needs to be protected
Harold-
Almost this entire site is devoted to showing you reasons why what you just wrote is a total illusion. People buy innovative products-that's your reason to innovate. Being first to market gives you a considerable advantage, even if you're only first by a month. And if patents were so great for innovation, why has R&D spending remained flat in the US for the past 50 years?
Try reading the site and gathering some data before you post such naive opinions.
...that Kevin seems to be asking is, "Is internet access a right or a service?" If it is a service, the ISP can take access away because your name is Melvin. If it is a right, however, then due process would be necessary for the denial of access. I have to admit, I don't really have a good argument either way. Here in the US, Congress has made statements implying that it should be a right. However, ISP's still have the ability to deny access for economic reasons, which would make it a service.
The only value that publishers truly add is distribution. (Financing can really be handled by anyone.) If the future of distribution is online, and any joe can rent space on a server, what is the value of the publisher? Could we be seeing the suicide of game publishing?
It seems like corporate executives that support software patents and the patent system in it's current state are NOT acting in the best interests of the corporations they work for or their shareholders. Time and again the large corporation gets the shakedown from some troll, and who pays for it? Not the executives, no. The shareholders take the hit for the executive's misconceptions. Even if the company wins, it's thousands wasted on court costs at a time when many companies are scrimping on office supplies.
On the post: US's Global IP Cops Bemoan Anti-IP Activists For Making Their Lives More Difficult
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not Their Job
On the post: US's Global IP Cops Bemoan Anti-IP Activists For Making Their Lives More Difficult
Re: I um, agree with Mr. Donahue
On the post: The Cultural Gulf Between Lawyers And Technologists On Patent Law
Re: Patents are about novelty & nonobviousness - value
On the post: Sweden Considering Law To Allow Police To Go After File Sharers
Putting pieces into place
On the post: When All You Have Is A Patent Hammer, Every Software Task Looks Like A Nail
Re: Re: What techies think is irrelivant
On the post: When All You Have Is A Patent Hammer, Every Software Task Looks Like A Nail
What techies think is irrelivant
On the post: The Cultural Gulf Between Lawyers And Technologists On Patent Law
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What techies think is irrelevant
Patents on dos... linking to a "software patent" page where the patents include physical devices... I hope you're not trying to become a trial attorney. Your arguments don't hold water.
Nice sidestep of the copyright issue, investor issue, and lack of innovation issue. Maybe you'll win a case yet!
On the post: The Cultural Gulf Between Lawyers And Technologists On Patent Law
Re: Re: Re: What techies think is irrelevant
To put it another way: had software patents been available, there would be no Excel or Lotus spreadsheets, it would all be VisiCalc. There would be no Word or Word Perfect, it would all be WordStar. The list goes on and on, with no one having the need to improve or innovate because they have cornered the market via patent.
Deal with it: angel investors, venture capital, servers, snacks and caffeinated drinks all came before software patents were considered viable, and would easily survive their demise. The only thing that would be eliminated is IP patent lawyers.
On the post: The Cultural Gulf Between Lawyers And Technologists On Patent Law
Re: What techies think is irrelevant
What matters is what the lawyers think, because they are the ones who get things done! Do you think we'd have electricity without lawyers? Or the corporations that fund the lawyers? Lawyers are the only ones to gain or lose anything by the elimination of software patents, and what would we do without lawyers?
So just leave yer mitts off them thar patents, if ya know what's good fer ya!
On the post: IBM Patents Removing Leading/Trailing Blanks
Re: I guess none of you read the actual patent.....
On the post: IBM Patents Removing Leading/Trailing Blanks
To Da Lawyers...
And if it IS perjury, and the individual IS prosecuted, wouldn't the fear generated cut down on the USPTO's workload?
On the post: IBM Patents Removing Leading/Trailing Blanks
Ironic
On the post: iTunes Songs Don't Have DRM, But They Contain Your Email Address
Re: One step back?
On the post: Viacom, Time Warner Cable Fight Over Cost Of Comedy Central, MTV
I agree...
On the post: If You're Measuring Productivity In Hours, You're Doing It Wrong
Old information
And since when is this "information overload"? Information overload is more information than you can process, and has nothing to do with distractions. This is context-switching, plain and simple. Oh, darn, is context-switching not a buzzword?
"Ground breaking research." Yeah.
On the post: Why Obama Should Change US Trade Policy On Intellectual Property
Re: why intellectual property needs to be protected
Almost this entire site is devoted to showing you reasons why what you just wrote is a total illusion. People buy innovative products-that's your reason to innovate. Being first to market gives you a considerable advantage, even if you're only first by a month. And if patents were so great for innovation, why has R&D spending remained flat in the US for the past 50 years?
Try reading the site and gathering some data before you post such naive opinions.
On the post: Do We Really Want An Internet Run By Lynch Mobs?
The fundamental question...
I dunno. Someone give a good argument.
On the post: Spore's DRM So Effective It Was The Most Downloaded Game Of The Year
Re: Re:
On the post: Don't Speak Your Mind In British Columbia -- Even At Home
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Silicon Valley Patent Attorneys Register Their Own Patents; Sue Google, Microsoft, Yahoo And Others
Ya know...
Next >>