It doesn't work though. Everybody knows it doesn't work. Even people in the US admit their system is a hopeless mess, a train wreck. You really have something to hold on to there and be proud of don't you.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Jury Members Discuss Thought Process Behind Apple vs. Samsung Verdict
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It doesn't work though. Everybody knows it doesn't work. Even people in the US admit their system is a hopeless mess, a train wreck. You really have something to hold on to there and be proud of don't you.
It's an absolute disgrace that Apple was granted a patent for "bounce back".
It's not an invention. The light bulb was an invention, the photocopier was an invention, the microwave oven was an invention and so on.
Patents are supposed to protect genuine new inventions. "Bounce back" is a software feature. It's a few lines of code. It's NOT an invention.
THAT is why so many people in the tech world are so angry about this judgement. It makes a mockery of the patent system.
In the United States, software and interface elements are allowed patent protection.
What you're saying is that "hey, all that time you spent working with users for a great user interface, it's worth zippo, sucker! You shoulda been fiddling with transistors and gears, and said screw the interface - but thanks for spending the time because we'll all make use of what you created."
And you want to impose that view on us. No sale.
For all your cynicism it might interest you to know that just last month the European Union agreed plans for a Single European Patent System across all 27 member countries. A new Unified Patent Court will have exclusive jurisdiction over patents. Its creation aims to remove cumbersome and costly procedures to obtain patent protection in Europe.
Maybe we're just a little more optimistic on this side of the pond.
I look forward to seeing how it goes, see if they're able to actually provide a cheap and cost effective way of protecting your patents and will actually provide due process.
I don't care what you impose on US customers - what I'm angry about is that by proxy you are imposing this crap on me as well simply because worldwide products have to meet stupid US patent laws so we get landed with the same products that adhere to this nonsense.
This is NOT an invention and it never will be.
I'm sure all those against software patents would feel different if they had actual skin in the game.
Bet your ass most of the detractors would be filling out patent forms if they created a marketable idea.
OK. WHY. What is it that makes an invention worthy of protection that a new way of interacting with hardware (done in software) isn't worthy of protection? What's the moral difference between spending a year tweaking transistors and gears to make something people find useful, and spending a year tweaking code and appearances to make something people find useful (other than the latter is so much easier to copy)?
Oh, and as for imposing this crap on you - what you're saying is "this isn't worth anything. How dare you keep companies from including it in their products". If the value of this is zero, then then loss in not having it in the devices you can buy in the UK is zero.
Not true. I've known people who are philosophically opposed to software patents and have passed on opportunities to get patents they could have gotten.
If I create an app for the iTunes AppStore would that be a patentable in the US?
I'm not saying it's not worthy - I'm saying it not an invention. An invention is something totally new that has never been seen before. This is a modification of an existing product and therefore by definition it's not genuinely new.
I'm sorry but if we go down this path then every few lines of code will be patented. Every single part of every software product will be patented. Imagine if someone had patented the "print" button or icon. This is just ridiculous and it will seriously stifle the future of software development.
I honestly did not realise that things had gotten this bad. This is just beyond a joke now.
Not necessarily. NOW THEY WILL. But before they would just put it up for FRAND. Now, they will make sure others don't get it unless they pay vast sums of money.
----------
Fanboys here don't care. Until it greatly affects their products. If a major Apple product gets stopped because of patents, it's suddenly 'unfair'.
The key to a software patent is a new way of doing something, a new way of interacting with the customer, a new way to solve a problem. I'm not a patent expert, though I play one on the Internet, but there are requirements for something to be patentable.
As for "every few lines of code will be patented", can't the same be said of "any arrangement of circuits" or "any collection of gears be patented"?
Oh, and BTW, there are LOTs of nice conservative hardware patents (none of this new-fangled protection of bits and such) that are about "a better method of doing this" or "an improved version of that". I presume you'd ban patents on those too, because they aren't something that is totally new that no one has ever seen before?
One more BTW (editing this in), H.264 - patentable or not?
Last edited:
Because if there's a trend, sometimes it's best follow. Especially if it's working in other countries. You shouldn't be a a Nationalist.
Just consider what others are doing and see fi it works. Like how some countries have adopted their own constitution, seeing that it's working in a large portion of modern countries.
Just because the US does something, doesn't mean they are automatically right. Take slavery for example, wrong. But constitution and a limited for of democracy seems to be right.
Right right, everyone suddenly knows a guy that's a tech Gandhi that lives for tech altruism and open source.
You live in a fanciful world where a bunch of bureaucrats can fix a problem created by a bunch of bureaucrats. I wish I lived there too. I bet there are unicorns and leprechauns.
Wow, what a ridiculous point. You invent something great, you could absolutely monetize it in your own country. And the point about China stealing the patent? In what unicorn-filled world do you think you could force China to agree to an international patent system or follow the rules of such a system?
Please give me examples where China has done what you said. They certainly rip-off patents to sell within their own country. I'm not sure where they've successfully then made a fortune by selling this product to the rest of the world with a patent. After all, what prevented the US company from obtaining the international patents first?
Not as a comment on the case itself, but what says that the international battles came to the right decision and not the US? By vote of hands?
Ahh, so we get to it. You want the US to change its system to benefit you and other UK residents although it might hurt US citizens. Who's the narrow-minded nationalist now?
I guess the US should apologize for its economic prowess by bending to the will UK because some nationalist UK residents despise that the US has too much say in the world economy.
The US government only has responsibility to its own citizens in much the same way the UK government only has responsibility to its own citizens. If the US was interested in the UK changing something, it must make the argument in a manner that demonstrates that it benefits UK citizens. Same true of the opposite. No, you want a version of international communism where every nation works for the collective good of every other nation. Sorry, if this is your view, I'm going to stop this debate. You're hopelessly naive.
For me, the value in a software patent lies in its specificity.
When I view a patent infringement lawsuit as unfair, it falls into one of these categories:
(a) The patent is extremely vague. "Users will be shown when they have scrolled too far" is vague. And there have been worse. Whatever else, these utility patents are specific. (And yes, the design patents and trade dress stuff isn't that specific and I'd like to see them all thrown out.)
(b) The patent is stretched to the breaking point. "I have a patent on a computer-controlled answering machine. Clearly, anything involved with speech is a violation of this"
(c) A product is released, marketed wildly to the point where that tribe in the Amazon with no connection to modern society has heard about it, and years later someone shows up with a patent saying "hey, you owe me a kabillion dollars (and in practice, that patent will suffer from (a) and/or (b) ).
Yes quite frankly I would. Patents should be about protecting new products. Whoever invented the word processing software or spreadsheet software deserves a patent. They were totally new products. Bounce back is a feature not a product. It would be like saying Microsoft can patent every new feature of Office 13. It's plain ridiculous.
I know there has been some talk of patent reform in the US. If this the sad state of affairs we've reached I hope they hurry up and do something sooner rather than later.
Thanks for addressing my points individually and providing an informed response. Oh wait, no, let's resort to ad hominem attacks instead.
On what basis can you state that European patent systems are working better than the US? As deeply flawed as the US' is, I still see no reason it should subjugate its legal system to an international community instead of just simply fixing its flaws. The way you go from A to B is ridiculous. If things work in other countries, we should adopt it. That does not mean that we need an international panel to impose it on us. That's a ridiculous notion. And it's not nationalism - it's understanding that flexibility in fixing your system and tuning it to your country's needs requires you to have control of your system.
What the hell? Where did I say the US has the right system? I acknowledge its flaws. Flaws does not equal international patent standards. I never said to ignore what works in the rest of the world. I said the US shouldn't implement what doesn't work in the rest of the world, but would be forced to if it subjugates its legal system to an international one.
OK, going back to the movie I've referenced in the past, Flash of Genius:
Robert Kearns invented intermittent windshield wipers. It was an improvement on plain old windshield wipers. You'd refuse him a patent?
Bounce-back is a methodology. It's a solution to a problem with touch-screen editing. There was no solution to that before this.
Obviously there seems to be a lack of reading comprehension skills.
Again, I never said we have to other countries use it, we have to. But it's obviously a mess in THIS COUNTRY. I never said anything about international legal standards. I'm simply saying, other countries are functioning fine without our mess of a system and perhaps it should be LOOKED AT.
CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU?
"It's a mess in THIS COUNTRY" meaning "they aren't coming up with the answers I'd like"
My initial comment that you quoted in the previous post was to someone who was talking about imposing an international standard for patents. I suggest you catch up on the debate before addressing a point that I was not making in my comment.
Oh the irony of commenting on my reading comprehension.
Yeah, but it's not a new product. Intermitten windshield wipers are the WIPERS WITH INTERMITTENT DISRUPTION.
The Windows in Windows, for example are what make it unique. The boxes them selves don't make a new product. Hence why we have trade dresses.
So you'd have told Robert Kearns, hey, great work solving the engineering problem that the best engineers at Ford was unable to crack. Nope, you get nothing for that. Have a nice day.
Actually, I may have misunderstood you.
But in any case - patent law in the United States has NEVER been limited to a "new product". A "new engine" (which is pretty useless without being part of a product that uses an engine) can and has been patented.
No, I just don't want your crappy system to affect me. If we are now trading insults then thankfully the US say in the world economy as you put it is diminishing by the day. What does your national debt currently stand at? I'm not sure I could fit that many zeros on the screen.
I can't think of a single thing I own that was made in America. In fact the Apple products I've got are just about the only American designed products I have, and even they were designed by a Brit so I'm happy with that. I prefer Adidas to Nike. I always buy European cars. All my tech goods are Japanese. Most of my electrical goods are German and most things I own were probably made in China.
Oh yeah baseball. I do like baseball so there you go. It's not all bad.