Posts:
617
Registered:
5/9/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 2:08 AM
in response to: fatalist
|
|
|
fatalist,
You can argue whether software patents are good or evil, there are intelligent people on both sides of the fence with various reasons to support their views. However to pretend that software patents don't exists is patently false (pun intended).
If a patent can be enforced against someone for developing software on a generic CPU, then it is indeed at least partly a software patent, even if the invention is not stated as such. In fact that might be the basis for one definition of a software patent, although highly paid lawyers could do better.
Software patents do exist. Proof by contradiction: if software patents did not exist, then software/websites would not be found guilty of patent infringement. Since they do infringe patents, software patents do exist. It is impossible today to write any significant piece of software without infringing a software patent.
"any software piece can be implemented as a specialized hardware chip and any hardware chip can be simulated in software"
So what? Should a patent on a hardware implementation of an algorithm (such as a codec in your example) prohibit alternate generic software versions of the algorithm? What about creating the algorithm in a new programming language or platform, or a new programming paradigm? Software patents today cover all implementations and derivatives, regardless of the programming language or platform. They can be violated by developers who never even had the opportunity to see or copy the original.
It's exactly like telling a mathematician to solve a problem, but he's not allowed to use certain constructs even if they're a natural byproduct of the derivation. Furthermore, there are dozens of unusable constructs issued each day going back over a decade, written in dense legalese. Lastly, the mathematician must try to avoid pending patents, since they might be enforced retroactively.
This creates an enormous waste of engineering effort. The only good news here is that routine enforcement is extremely spotty and the patents are likely to have prior art. SMBs are unlikely to be sued until the money starts rolling in.
Of course (sometimes) there's the option of licensing a patent, but, like in my case, it can be too expensive to be worthwhile. Also, unless something is had in return, what exactly the point of paying a third party for the right to use one's own code?
That's only my opinion. Other opinions are valid too, but you're talking to the wrong crowd if you think that you can sell the notion that software patents don't exist.
|
|
Posts:
651
Registered:
7/28/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 10:47 AM
in response to: Job Talk
|
|
|
"They can be violated by developers who never even had the opportunity to see or copy the original."
Do you mean that any developer out there could *accidentally* infringe on something like RSA patent, not to mention Karmarkar patent ?
Just give me a break, will you ?
BTW, your "proof" is invalid and your logic is flawed
This is not to dispute the fact that the majority of ***** and IBM patents are utter ********
|
|
Posts:
4,350
Registered:
2/11/09
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 11:33 AM
in response to: fatalist
|
|
|
I'm suprised that the for each oObject in etc... loop hasn't been patented by MS.
|
|
Posts:
617
Registered:
5/9/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 12:45 PM
in response to: fatalist
|
|
|
fatalist,
"Just give me a break, will you ?"
You're pro-software patent. I disagree with you and that's fine (although you should answer the questions in this thread http://seeker.dice.com/olc/message.jspa?messageID=155249 ).
However I am right to call you out on your claim that they don't exist.
"BTW, your "proof" is invalid and your logic is flawed"
Then prove it.
|
|
Posts:
651
Registered:
7/28/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 1:14 PM
in response to: Job Talk
|
|
|
"Then prove it."
Just read this:
http://www.ipjur.com/01.php3
This is written by a lawyer, a pretty smart one
|
|
Posts:
617
Registered:
5/9/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 1:27 PM
in response to: fatalist
|
|
|
fatalist,
I didn't mean to avoid this question.
"Do you mean that any developer out there could *accidentally* infringe on something like RSA patent, not to mention Karmarkar patent?"
I'm not familiar with the details of those patents, but yes cryptographic patents based on modulus arithmetic are a good example of algorithms which can be mathematically derived by multiple parties without collaborating. Perfect binary compatibility would be highly unlikely, however software patents generally protect the filer from any other implementation of the algorithm. So it wouldn't matter that your implementation is different, it would still infringe.
Another example is the Unisys LZH compression patent. It's a neat algorithm which can be derived in about an hour, often as an exercise for CS students. Ironically, those students would not be allowed to use the algorithm legally until the patent expired recently.
Accidental use of patents is not only possible, it is exceedingly likely given the growing number of patents and developers.
|
|
Posts:
617
Registered:
5/9/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 1:31 PM
in response to: fatalist
|
|
|
fatalist,
"Just read this...This is written by a lawyer, a pretty smart one "
Hmm, did you read it??? He agrees with me!
Q1: Can software be patented?
A1: In short, the answer is twofold:
* NO, software seen as text in a linguistical sense cannot be subject-matter of a patent claim.
* YES, the functional ideas behind the text can be patented if they are of a technical nature, novel, inventive and industrially applicable.
His answer is correct. Software as text is protected by copyright, not patents. Software algorithms and functional ideas are patentable.
I'm done with this thread.
|
|
Posts:
651
Registered:
7/28/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 2:14 PM
in response to: Job Talk
|
|
|
"It's a neat algorithm which can be derived in about an hour, often as an exercise for CS students."
Must be damn smart CS students
If you say you can come up with stuff like this on your own (without the benefit of knowing some key ideas behind the solution) then I have a big bridge in Brooklyn for sale
Cryptography took many many PhD folks many decades of hard work and sleepless nights to achieve the present elegant solution
|
|
Posts:
651
Registered:
7/28/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 2:21 PM
in response to: Job Talk
|
|
|
"Software as text is protected by copyright, not patents."
Software as text is meaningless
You need a processor with particular instruction set and the rest of the goodies - compilers etc. to make your "software text" meaningful
|
|
Posts:
4,682
Registered:
3/4/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 2:57 PM
in response to: Job Talk
|
|
|
> His answer is correct. Software as text is protected
> by copyright, not patents. Software algorithms and
> functional ideas are patentable.
Software as binary is also protected. For example, if you make, and sell, unauthorized copies of ms-windows, that is a copyright violation, not a patent violation.
|
|
Posts:
651
Registered:
7/28/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 3:06 PM
in response to: walterbyrd
|
|
|
"Software as binary is also protected. For example, if you make, and sell, unauthorized copies of ms-windows, that is a copyright violation, not a patent violation."
Actually, both, I think
But patent infringement is a civil matter (no jail term for offenders, at least not in US) while copyright violation is a criminal offense
Hence you will be nailed for copyright violation, not for patent infringement (in its various forms e.g. direct infringement, contributory infringement etc)
|
|
Posts:
4,682
Registered:
3/4/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 3:12 PM
in response to: fatalist
|
|
|
> Do you mean that any developer out there could
> *accidentally* infringe on something like RSA patent,
> not to mention Karmarkar patent ?
People accidentally violate patents all the time. With a system that lets you patent "2 + 2 = 4" there is really no way to avoid it.
It used to be that people patented things, like a light bulb, or typewriter. Now, the situation is entirely insane. People patent ideas they never thought of, people patent processes, and parts of processes, and parts of parts of parts of processes. People patent stupidly obvious ideas like a recipe for a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, or the idea of using a laser pointer to play with a cat.
Many patents are held by patent trolls - lawfirms who only own patents, and never plan to use them except to sue other people. Companies like Microsoft, hire these patent trolls, like Acacia, to file harassment lawsuits against Microsoft competitors, like Redhat. Even if the lawsuits are meritless, they are enough to hurt competitors. TomTom lost to Microsoft because TomTom could not afford the fight.
Please be aware, it is not just Microsoft that plays this game. I think that practially all patents filed today are BS. The US patent system is completely broken.
|
|
Posts:
651
Registered:
7/28/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 3:56 PM
in response to: walterbyrd
|
|
|
"people patent processes, and parts of processes, and parts of parts of parts of processes.:
Perhaps you should know that the very first patent issued in US was a process patent
You are obviously misinformed a lot
You only get true picture when you come up with some useful invention on your own, patent it and try to make industry respect your patent
yes, they will all say they invented it independently and call you a troll
Patent system is broken, but for a different reason
|
|
Posts:
51
Registered:
11/2/09
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 4, 2009 5:03 PM
in response to: fatalist
|
|
|
>>"It's a neat algorithm which can be derived in about an hour, often as an exercise for CS students."
>Must be damn smart CS students
LZW was patented twice, once by IBM and once by Unisys.
> If you say you can come up with stuff like this on your own (without the benefit of knowing some
> key ideas behind the solution) then I have a big bridge in Brooklyn for sale
There's one patent out there on representing XML files as the text (exclusive of the tags), plus a dictionary of tags with indices into the text. I could easily have come up with _that_ one on my own; I'm sure Microsoft, the accused infringer, did so -- though I'd bet IBM did it before them with SGML and GML documents. There's another patent on synchronizing state in a multi-player networked game for which I was using software embodying the very same "inventions" in the 1980s.
Public key cryptography was invented not once but twice before RSA came up with their patented implementation (which claimed the basic mathematical operation of exponentiation on a finite field). It's just that the previous two inventions were at the NSA and the British equivalent thereof, and so weren't public.
The patent system is _broken_. It amounts to nothing more than a minefield for an honest developer.
|
|
Posts:
4,682
Registered:
3/4/08
|
|
|
|
Re: There should be no limits on H1B visas, the market should decide
Posted:
Nov 5, 2009 4:36 AM
in response to: fatalist
|
|
|
> Perhaps you should know that the very first patent
> issued in US was a process patent
> On July 31, 1790, the first U.S. patent was issued to Samuel Hopkins for an improvement "in the making of Pot ash and Pearl ash by a new Apparatus and Process." This patent was signed by then president George Washington.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Patent_Office
> You are obviously misinformed a lot
Maybe you are somewhat uninformed, if you don't know about the patent games that go on today with "submarine patents" and "patent trolls" and the like. Today, I doubt you could file your taxes without infringing on some patent to figure taxes. From the same link:
> The USPTO has been criticized for granting patents for impossible or absurd, already known, or arguably obvious inventions
> You only get true picture when you come up with some
> useful invention on your own, patent it and try to
> make industry respect your patent
> yes, they will all say they invented it independently
> and call you a troll
WTF? Patent trolls make no claims of inventing anything. They are typically law firms which specialize in buying up submarine patents for no other purpose than filing lawsuits, and collecting settlements. Patent trolling is nothing but a little game that lawyers play. I have nothing against true inventors who honestly want to protect their ideas - but those types of patents are becoming increasing rare.
|
|
|
Legend
|
|
Helpful Answer
|
|
Correct Answer
|
|
