Patents by definition will be useless in a few years anyway simply because China ignores them. They just buy / and copy and there's nothing the original party can do.
On 06/03/2011, at 8:38 AM, Ryan Waterer <[email protected]> wrote: > I thought the Paul allen suit was dismissed, then re-filed within the > deadline. I believe that the suit is still alive and well. I did a quick > internet search, and I didn't see anything that updates the status since Paul > Allen refiled the suit on December 29th, 2010 (the last day given to refile > the suit). > > --Ryan > > On Mar 5, 2011, at 12:32 PM, Cédric Beust ♔ wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 11:08 AM, phil swenson <[email protected]> wrote: >> I could argue against software patents, but this guy does it way better than >> I ever could: http://www.feld.com/wp/category/patents >> >> Really? Just the same old arguments that the system is broken without >> showing that he's thought much about the consequences of a world without >> software patents, nor a lot of elaboration as to why they stifle innovation. >> I've seen much better articulated arguments, to be honest. >> >> Besides, the Paul Allen suit was thrown out, which seems to indicate that >> the system works as expected. >> >> I'm a reformist, not an abolitionist. I think software patents work and they >> enable innovation. I do think they should be revised, particularly on two >> specific points: >> Shorter duration. It's fair for someone who comes up with a real innovation >> to enjoy a first mover advantage, but this duration should be adjusted to >> software scales. Maybe two years or something like that. >> >> Troll patents should not be allowed to exist. Not quite sure what can be >> done there, maybe that patents cannot be transferred, or can only be >> enforced if the corporation suing can show that their business is based on >> the patent they are suing about. In other words, they have a product on the >> market place that is based on that patent. >> At least, I'm trying to offer concrete solutions that are based on >> compromises and on the observation of how the world works today, as opposed >> to most of the hand waving that I see pattern abolitionists do most of the >> time ("They kill innovation. Now upvote me"). >> >> -- >> Cédric >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "The Java Posse" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
