+1, @ least 75% if the Oracle vs Google case is typical.
On Aug 10, 2011, at 10:50 PM, Jess Holle wrote: > Until the patent office can figure out how to judge real innovation and > uniqueness in a software patent it should stop issuing any. They should also > declare that existing software patents are suspect and set a very high burden > of proof for any to retain their legitimacy. The patent office and/or courts > could then invalidate 99+% of all existing software patents. > > Whether there are any sufficiently innovating and unique items to deserve a > patent in this area is an open question. However, the vast majority of > software patents that come up in lawsuits, etc, are broad, non-nonsensical > land grabs of vast conceptual spaces without any evidence of originality of > thought. These should clearly be invalidated. > > -- > Jess Holle > > -- > 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.
