5 ms·
I think the only sane answer would be a clearcut Yes, but the question is also highly misleading by insinuating that software patents actually cover innovative
by JohnStrangeII 7y ago
I think the only sane answer would be a clearcut Yes, but the question is also highly misleading by insinuating that software patents actually cover innovative theorems. The vast majority of them don't.
Austin Meyer, the maker of the X-Plane flight simulator, was sued for millions of dollars because his app used an in-app purchase option made available by an existing 3rd part SDK.
There is a whole industry of inventing bogus software patents that take utterly trivial everyday business processes like giving someone money for a product, dress them up in fancy lawyer talk and general descriptions of non-existent, "systems" or "methods" without any example or prototype, and then sue people over it. In-app purchases? Better pay up! You have a fax machine or scanner? Pay! Storing business data on some electronic device for later retrieval? Better pay an arbitrarily high patent license fee!
It's absurd.
- jandrewrogers 7y agoThat is a business method patent, not an algorithm patent. They are completely unrelated.
- JohnStrangeII 7y agoI also gave an example of an equally silly software patent. Besides, I would not call different sorts of patents "completely unrelated". All of them have trolls, have been granted for silly and trivial things, and the system is completely broken. It´s bizarre enough that there are judges and lawyers who apparently think that "business logic" and "algorithms", as well as "mathematics" and "logic", are different entities that can be distinguished from each other...