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.
Lodsys Threatens to Sue App Store Developers Over In-App Purchases and Upgrade Links
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
La la la la, TexasAggie doesn't understand something so he's going, "la la la la".
Software doesn't 'rely on math'. It *is* math. Let me clue you in to something. That expensive CPU sitting inside your computer? It is completely incapable of doing anything other than performing mathematical operations. That's it. Nothing else. Now, where does software run? On that same CPU.
That's what you're getting mixed up. One is hardware. It actually does something. The other is software. It models something.
Let's say you have a circuit designed to encrypt data. You feed a number in, and you get a different (encrypted) number out.
Let's say you have *software* designed to encrypt data. That's all fine and good, but it still doesn't *do* anything. Load that software onto some hardware, and the *hardware* does something.
Software does not perform any operations. Software is the set of operations to be performed.
Now we know who doesn't have a software background in this thread.
Must be you.
Last edited by a moderator:
That doesn't mean software is math. Again, stop. You have obviously never done any kind of software engineering.
Address the arguments. Resorting to "Nyuh uh, you're stupid" doesn't win you any credibility here. Again, software is processes and data structures, lists of tasks to accomplish and a description of storage, input and output requirements, some of which might be math. Software isn't math per se, no matter what stack/pointer/register arithmetics are used to implement it. You're thinking too low-level, so either you are an assembly code monkey or you're not in the field of software engineering at all.
90% of software engineering is done with a pencil and a sheet of paper (though most people would rather use computerized tools these days). 10% is actual typing of code, which depending on the language, might not involve any kind of math equations by the programmer.
Last edited:
No kidding. But that doesn't mean that software is math. It means the software includes instructions that cause a CPU to perform mathematical operations to implement a larger function - display an image, control a nuclear reactor, shut down a car engine.
So now software goes from math to a set of operations to be performed. You're almost there. Software is not an abstract set of operations, it is the instructions to perform those operations.
It's been fun, but I will happily say that the courts disagree with you, so if you don't like it, whine to Congress.
This company is smart indeed!! Instead of attacking Apple directly (knowing they don't stand a chance) they go after what hurts them the most, not their pocket, but their user base. By Attacking the small developers, they'll cause panic and fear amongst developers, which puts Apple in a weak position to wrap things up allot faster than actually going to lengthy patent trials.
Just hoping Apple does have a trick or two up their sleeves to demolish those idiots.
Just hoping Apple does have a trick or two up their sleeves to demolish those idiots.
This suing issue is out of control already. As if the new business is suing others for stupid patents.
Hmm. Let's add some context here to the calls of claiming "Nyuh uh, you're stupid". You've done it twice now. The second time while attempting to blame me for it.
Must be you.Now we know who doesn't have a software background in this thread.
Yes, better than 90% of programming does not directly involve typing things such as "a = exp(b, 2) + (PI * rad);". That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that software is mathematics. Would you claim that graph theory is not mathematics because someone describes it to you using normal english?
What most programmers these days deal directly with are libraries and abstraction layers designed to simplify our lives by hiding all the nitty gritty details of what's going on behind the scenes. (Much like how most users get a GUI instead of having to remember console commands.)
It seems to me that you're conflating source code with software. They are two different things, much like a script is not the same thing as a play. Source code is data which is parsed by a compiler. Software is what you get out of the compiler.
I remember dealing with early CPUs that, in addition to comparison, could do *one* of the 'big 4' classic operations. Addition. The CPU couldn't subtract. It couldn't multiply. It *certainly* couldn't divide.
Before you again claim (again) that I'm stupid, or that I don't know what I'm talking about, let me explain it to you.
The CPU couldn't subtract, so the software told it to add the negative of the value. (8 - 3 == 8 + -3) It couldn't multiply, so it added the value repeatedly. (8 * 3 = 8 + 8 + 8)
The fact that you, as a programmer, don't have to deal with that level of detail anymore (thanks to abstraction layers) changes *absolutely nothing* about what is going on at the CPU level, where software is executed.
Actually, upon a closer reading, you seem to be conflating software with the spec used to tell the programmers what they need to implement.
A patent lawyer who doesn't understand what software is saddens me, but doesn't surprise me. It's kind of par for the course, since law and software development are both extremely specialized fields.
On the other hand, someone claiming to have extensive software engineering experience who doesn't understand what software is, worries me quite a bit.
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't believe that any of the Patent law suits out there are realistic, and those filed those knows that. The aim is not to "win" the law suite, the aim is always to spread bad rumors and cause losses indirectly.
When Microsoft files a law suite against Apple regarding the use of word "App Store" will spread that information world wide, those who are loyal to MS and who actually hate Apple, will spread the word for their friends, communities....etc which of course by that time the story is more interesting and long term, it might become "Microsoft is going to Shut down App Store", anyone who thinks about going iPhone way will just divert. Apple Have a large loyal base of users, but they don't have all the developers in the world in their side, who are huge and most if not all wanting to venture into this business.
If, as I stated, and you admit, a CPU can do nothing more than perform mathematical operations, and a CPU executes software, how do you propose that software is anything *but* math?
A mathematical algorithm is a set (usually, but not always a serial listing) of instructions telling the computer what operations to perform. It matters not a whit whether the computer is a person with a pencil and paper, or a piece of etched silicon.
I wish I could say the same. Unfortunately, I only get to disappointedly say that the courts have gotten it consistently wrong because the first court to ponder the question didn't understand that software is math, and later courts used that ruling as precedence rather than fixing an error.
The worst part is the "fix" for the patent system is moving to a "first to file" model instead of a "first to invent" model. Like that is really going to fix anything...
If that passes we can look forward to companies that do nothing but write frivolous patents and file them first regardless of how obvious or how long something has been developed, then continue to extort money like leeches from businesses that really innovate. With first to file they can be even more assured their extortion will be upheld in the courts.
Lawyers and the government have too much invested in the patent system to really want to fix it. It is a cash cow for them and a complete farce.
If that passes we can look forward to companies that do nothing but write frivolous patents and file them first regardless of how obvious or how long something has been developed, then continue to extort money like leeches from businesses that really innovate. With first to file they can be even more assured their extortion will be upheld in the courts.
Lawyers and the government have too much invested in the patent system to really want to fix it. It is a cash cow for them and a complete farce.
No it wouldn't. You obviously never read any of the Apple sues people threads since they all support the other guy (even though generally its the other guy who started the suing first).
This is completely different. This would be like you getting sued for building a bird house in from a kit that uses a patented nail.
You might want to look into my background a little bit to see what I did for 15 years prior to becoming a lawyer.
I'm all for developers and inventors protecting their intellectual property (Patents). However, there needs to be a new rule put in place soon as this really seems to be getting out of control.
I would think that if you don't protect your patent or IP within a reasonable period of time from point of infringement, then you effectively are giving up your rights. I would say 1 to 2 years max in order to give someone time to notice they've been infringed on. But they didn't notice this some time ago?
Also... the patent process needs some cleaning up. People are patenting silly things in an effort to hold rights to common functions or potentially common functions. Good insight, but hardly an invention.
I would think that if you don't protect your patent or IP within a reasonable period of time from point of infringement, then you effectively are giving up your rights. I would say 1 to 2 years max in order to give someone time to notice they've been infringed on. But they didn't notice this some time ago?
Also... the patent process needs some cleaning up. People are patenting silly things in an effort to hold rights to common functions or potentially common functions. Good insight, but hardly an invention.
Yes and yes.
If you read the patent, they were patenting companies talking to their customers and asking them what they want. IBM has done that from day 1.
They were claiming that the patent was about customers asking to turn on features already installed on a system. IBM did that with memory in some of their old mainframes. You would call IBM, ask for a memory upgrade, give them money, then, one of their technicians would go into the cage and flip a switch.
Females can be measured numerically. Unfortunately, the most common way is how much money they wind up costing you.
I just say we email this guy and let him know what an idiot he is. He is in no way shape or form contributing to the economic well being of this country. He is a Harvard and Wharton yuppie who will use every legality he ever learned about to screw someone.
here is his email: Mark.Small@lodsys.com dan@abelow.com
I encourage everyone to send him at least a little piece of your mind....
here is his email: Mark.Small@lodsys.com dan@abelow.com
I encourage everyone to send him at least a little piece of your mind....
I don't normally jump on these bandwagons, but I sent him a piece of my mind.
LOL what a company Lodsys must be, they're trying to sue the little guys because they are too chicken to challenge any large company that would whoop their ass.
This is one of those lawsuits which are just plain "weird", but the thing is... The guy does have a patent on it...
So here is a question to our lawyer friends in the forum, since Lodsys decided to go against all the small developers in hopes for a quick buck, if all iOS developers file "individual" law suits against Lodsys for let's say extortion or damages, would that put Lodsys out of it's misery?
I mean how many Apple developers are there? 100K? Wouldn't the legal fees alone put Lodsys to it's knees?
I mean how many Apple developers are there? 100K? Wouldn't the legal fees alone put Lodsys to it's knees?
I hope they fix the patent system and stop giving out crap like this. Or we consumer will keep paying for it more and more.
Last edited by a moderator: