4 ms·

I own a patent and I do feel bad. The idea was ridiculous, but I had our corporate lawyer swarming around me like a swarm of bees. I tried to explain to them th

I own a patent and I do feel bad. The idea was ridiculous, but I had our corporate lawyer swarming around me like a swarm of bees. I tried to explain to them that the idea is obvious. I even tried to get my name off the patent. Wasn't possible. Software patents are bad. period. An idea does not cost anything and it's not like you won't have an idea if you could not patent it. Patents should protect r&d cost, things that would not happen otherwise

btilly 14y ago
Do you own it, or are you listed as an author on it? There is a very significant difference.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- linuxhansl 14y ago
  Sorry, yeah that's an important distinction. No I do not own it. The company I work(ed) for does.
pbhjpbhj 14y ago
Which patent? Also: >"Patents should protect r&d cost, things that would not happen otherwise" // Can you conceive of a method by which patents can fairly allow for R&D costs to be recouped but would not allow money to be recouped that hadn't been paid out? Does this removal of incentive trouble you at all - the premise on which patents are founded is reward for sharing an idea with the public, without that reward will inventors share the details of their inventions? Personally I would just make the patent term significantly shorter. I think the pace of technological change has advanced enough that this won't cause a significant problem in recouping R&D costs. A term of 8 years, say, would allow enough time to recoup expense and gain a reward whilst allowing the public domain to benefit from the invention much sooner - it would be nice to put a revenue cap in place instead of a short term (to protect a small inventor who produces something beneficial for a small sector at great cost, or similar) but in practice I think that would be too difficult to legislate for fairly and without leaving too many holes for major corps to exploit.
- rhizome 14y ago
  Which patent? I like the idea of a rebellion by the people whose names are on patents, where they help with the invalidation. It could be a reasonably successful prioritization strategy.
- linuxhansl 14y ago
  Which patent? Sorry, don't like to identify myself.
- linuxhansl 14y ago
  Does this removal of incentive trouble you at all The public good is usually best served by healthy competition. Problems occur when r&d for an invention is very costly. This is not the case for software patents. Can you point me to a software patent that is protecting something of value (in term of cost of the invention)? And, personally, no, it does not bother me. Both me and the companies I worked for would have been better off without software patents. Like the author I do believe that copyright is a very important and useful legal construct (even open source software would not exist in its current form without it).

btilly 14y ago

Do you own it, or are you listed as an author on it? There is a very significant difference.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
linuxhansl 14y ago
Sorry, yeah that's an important distinction. No I do not own it. The company I work(ed) for does.

pbhjpbhj 14y ago

Which patent? Also: >"Patents should protect r&d cost, things that would not happen otherwise" // Can you conceive of a method by which patents can fairly allow for R&D costs to be recouped but would not allow money to be recouped that hadn't been paid out? Does this removal of incentive trouble you at all - the premise on which patents are founded is reward for sharing an idea with the public, without that reward will inventors share the details of their inventions? Personally I would just make the patent term significantly shorter. I think the pace of technological change has advanced enough that this won't cause a significant problem in recouping R&D costs. A term of 8 years, say, would allow enough time to recoup expense and gain a reward whilst allowing the public domain to benefit from the invention much sooner - it would be nice to put a revenue cap in place instead of a short term (to protect a small inventor who produces something beneficial for a small sector at great cost, or similar) but in practice I think that would be too difficult to legislate for fairly and without leaving too many holes for major corps to exploit.

rhizome 14y ago
Which patent? I like the idea of a rebellion by the people whose names are on patents, where they help with the invalidation. It could be a reasonably successful prioritization strategy.
linuxhansl 14y ago
Which patent? Sorry, don't like to identify myself.
linuxhansl 14y ago
Does this removal of incentive trouble you at all The public good is usually best served by healthy competition. Problems occur when r&d for an invention is very costly. This is not the case for software patents. Can you point me to a software patent that is protecting something of value (in term of cost of the invention)? And, personally, no, it does not bother me. Both me and the companies I worked for would have been better off without software patents. Like the author I do believe that copyright is a very important and useful legal construct (even open source software would not exist in its current form without it).