4 ms·

No, I don't think it does and I don't think simply stating that it is without providing any evidence for your case is going to change my mind or anyone's mind w

by fnid2 17y ago

No, I don't think it does and I don't think simply stating that it is without providing any evidence for your case is going to change my mind or anyone's mind who agrees with me, but it looks like I'm the only one. Anyway.... The legal system is there to figure out if a patent is absurd and if you read the whole patent for the swing, at the end, it was ruled out. At least claims A, B, C and D. That same review process exists for software patents too. The patent office is taking steps to fix some of the problems, at least it is being pragmatic about pre-approval review processes that still protect the inventor. Lots of arguments all the way to the echelon of the judicial system have taken place over software patents and it was ruled they are valid, so if a claim is to be made that they should be abolished -- it better be a very good one.

modeless 17y ago
>The legal system is there to figure out if a patent is absurd If the legal system was free and fast, you would have a point. However, the legal system is expensive and slow. A system where a patent as clearly absurd as this one can survive to the point of requiring a legal challenge to be overturned is simply unacceptable.
- fnid2 17y ago
  A patent also takes 8 years to come to fruition. There is a huge backup. Startups can be invented and sold in that amount of time or fail completely, so if it's just one person in a garage, there are bigger issues, but still, some of those people are saving up a lot of money right now selling iPhones. Even kids in malls and hackers in their basements. Perhaps I am being too egalitarian in my stance.
  - modeless 17y ago
    I agree. The patent system is too slow. I'm not sure what your point is, because that only seems to support the argument that the current system of software patents is absurd. Despite the slowness and expense of the review process, crap like this gets through all the time, then requiring an even slower and even more expensive legal challenge.
baddox 17y ago
I think the patent laws and the patent office should figure out if a patent application is absurd. Absurd patents should never exist, and the patent laws should be very clear and very strict. (Actually, I don't think we should have patents period.)

by fnid2 17y ago

modeless 17y ago

>The legal system is there to figure out if a patent is absurd If the legal system was free and fast, you would have a point. However, the legal system is expensive and slow. A system where a patent as clearly absurd as this one can survive to the point of requiring a legal challenge to be overturned is simply unacceptable.

fnid2 17y ago
A patent also takes 8 years to come to fruition. There is a huge backup. Startups can be invented and sold in that amount of time or fail completely, so if it's just one person in a garage, there are bigger issues, but still, some of those people are saving up a lot of money right now selling iPhones. Even kids in malls and hackers in their basements. Perhaps I am being too egalitarian in my stance.
- modeless 17y ago
  I agree. The patent system is too slow. I'm not sure what your point is, because that only seems to support the argument that the current system of software patents is absurd. Despite the slowness and expense of the review process, crap like this gets through all the time, then requiring an even slower and even more expensive legal challenge.

baddox 17y ago

I think the patent laws and the patent office should figure out if a patent application is absurd. Absurd patents should never exist, and the patent laws should be very clear and very strict. (Actually, I don't think we should have patents period.)