4 ms·
VirnetX's version of 'imessage' was released May 2015. Apple's imessage was released October 2011. Yet they're suing because Apple infringed on their vague co
by kneel 10y ago
VirnetX's version of 'imessage' was released May 2015.
Apple's imessage was released October 2011.
Yet they're suing because Apple infringed on their vague communication encryption patents from the early 2000s.
There should be massive fines for patent trolls to deter this kind of behavior. Patenting abstract ideas with no viable product should not be allowed.
- monochromatic 10y agoHaven't you heard? Abstract ideas aren't patentable--the Supreme Court cleared everything up in the Alice decision! /sarcasm
- wsinks 10y agoThank you for the sarcasm tag! I honestly use that on the internet lately because 63% of everything is sarcasm and then it's just a whole ridiculous mess of misunderstanding.
- jb613 10y ago> There should be massive fines for patent trolls to deter this kind of behavior. Patenting abstract ideas with no viable product should not be allowed. Then start with fining large corporations who each hold numerous patents that do not ship a corresponding "viable product" for.
- friendzis 10y agoHonestly I do not think it is the problem with a patent holder, but rather USPTO for giving patents to whatever. Maybe the problem is (or was) that staff were not knowledgeable about the subject enough. What are you saying sounds much like "People majoring in nose picking at college of Eastern Nowhere should not be allowed to run for President", or "people who won the lottery with random numbers should not be allowed to claim full reward". Patents are much like little pieces of law. And we can either believe in law in its entirety or ignore it whatsoever. I choose the former. If someone uses and abuses exceptions and loopholes in the law, the problem is with the law, not person using that to their advantage.