4 ms·
The problem is that threatening to throw those patents at small companies has proven, and will probably continue, to be effective. It doesn't matter whether or
by roguecoder 14y ago
The problem is that threatening to throw those patents at small companies has proven, and will probably continue, to be effective. It doesn't matter whether or not they effectively protect ideas when their true value lies in raising barriers to competition.
- zmmmmm 14y agoTrue, but I think the effect will even trickle down to smaller cases. That is the benefit of having a clear precedent set. For example when Big Co. now tries to sue Small Co. for implementing their API Small Co. will be able to stand up with much more confidence and tell them to go away. Even if that could have been interpreted from previous legal doctrine, having such a clear and and recent statement on it will bolster anybody in that situation to defend themselves instead of caving.
- nitrogen 14y agoIt's not a lack of courage that keeps small companies from defending themselves, it's a lack of money.
- zmmmmm 14y agoWell, I would argue a clear precedent dramatically lowers the cost of defending yourself as well. Instead of a team of lawyers to finesse obscure complicated points and amassing huge quantities of research and evidence it just comes down to a simple well established point of law: the stuff is not copyrightable (I'd agree doesn't help so much with patents, which aren't affected by precedent in this case).