4 ms·
Software patents need to be banned entirely and this is a perfect example of why. Google's ideal outcome is that no other browser would have tabs, making them i
by gnu8 11y ago
Software patents need to be banned entirely and this is a perfect example of why. Google's ideal outcome is that no other browser would have tabs, making them inferior to the point of not being usable. That is literally their desired outcome from filing this patent, and indeed it is the basis for every software patent. You can see just from the list of patents cited that Microsoft and many other companies have all taken out patents on obvious incremental design improvements on browser GUIs, and the reason that they do it is to gather ammo for some theoretical ultimate showdown that they imagine will end with their browser as the only remaining legal product. None of them are dealing in good faith, and this should confirm forever that Google no longer subscribes to "don't be evil" as a behavioral maxim.
- Paulods 11y agoYou use this as an example to how Google no longer subscribes to "don't be evil". At the same time how can Google protect its UI/UX if the patent system allows for cases like this? What if Microsoft or Apple went for the same patent and stopped Google from using it?
- monochromatic 11y ago> Google's ideal outcome is that no other browser would have tabs, making them inferior to the point of not being usable. That is literally their desired outcome from filing this patent, and indeed it is the basis for every software patent. Spoken like someone who has not even looked at the claims, and probably doesn't know what the word "claim" means.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoHey, Ad Hominem
- monochromatic 11y agoThat's not an ad hominem. "You're dumb, so we shouldn't care what you believe" is an ad hominem. "What you believe could only be believed by someone who's uninformed" is not.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoAnd your response is only possible from a stupid boogerhead who doesn't even know what a 'claim' is. Not an Ad Hominem. Sure.
- monochromatic 11y agoIt was sort of insulting (probably needlessly so), but it was not an ad hominem.