Apple Wins Patent for NFC-Enabled 'iTravel' Transportation Ticketing App

[LordVic]

I agree, the actual code will always be protected by copyright. The only thing sw patents do is protect ideas, which is ridiculous. Patents should only be given for unique concepts that have unique methods for implementation clearly described. Just re-using pre-existing concepts together or just happen to be the first to apply a pre-existing concept in a slightly different context shouldn't be sufficient.

exactly

based on this patent, if you were to take a new form of tissue paper, you could in thoery patent the idea of wiping your ass with it.

 

[macUser2007]

exactly

based on this patent, if you were to take a new form of tissue paper, you could in thoery patent the idea of wiping your ass with it.

And, yes, you are absolutely correct.

 

[tigress666]

But not things that have existed (like the above) in a form for centuries.

Tacking on a " ... , but on a computer" does not make it a new idea worthy of protecting.

So a: "Passbook where you store your itinerary .... but on a COMPUTER!"

Really?

You know what's even worse? So if you have asthma you probably use a ventolin inhaler. Ventolin now is old enough they make generics so you can find an affordable inhaler. Recently the government said they no longer could use CFC's in the inhaler. So ventolin has gone up to 100 dollars or so because the medical companies patented the device used to give the ventolin so you have to wait until that patent expires before the generics can make albuterol (the ingredient of ventolin) again.

Just reminds me of that (same medicine, just an inhaler that doesn't use CFCs).

This is an even more powerful example of why they allow too generic of a patent (or rather being able to tack on, Same idea but with this, is not a good idea to allow) is not a good thing.

That being said, there is the argument since it is allowed, if Apple didn't do it, some one else would and prevent apple from doing it. So one could say it is self defense on their part to ensure they are the ones who can do it. But maybe we should be yelling at the patent system, not Apple, for the problem.

 

[the8thark]

Are you a programmer?(*) If so, please tell us why you think software patents should exist in the USA, especially considering that many other countries don't have them. Thanks!

Btw, some people do see a middle ground; that perhaps with peer group review and a very limited period .. say two years... they might serve a purpose at times.

(*)Non-programmers honestly just won't be able to understand how easy it is for multiple people to come up with the same solutions when presented with a problem, and how most software patents do NOT contain detailed instructions, but seem to be more about ideas... which are not patentable.

I quite like this middle ground option. Software innovation moves along at a fast enough pace that 2 year software can be old hat.

The multiple solutions to the same problem I get that totally and I'm no programmer. But for hardware if two people come up with the same solution, the first one to patent etc it wins. I think software patents should about the solution to the problem encountered. Ie very specific. Not just any ol idea getting patented.

 

[SockRolid]

I believe you are mistaking an attack on a corrupt and dysfunctional system as an attack on your favorite fruit....

Yeah, you're probably right. (And yes, I love oranges!)