3 ms·

http://www.gardenweasel.com/News/AUGUST2006Newsletter.pdf http://www.gardenweasel.com/News/AUGUST2006Newsletter.pdf [PDF] In [Dean, of Segway fame] Kamen's ope

http://www.gardenweasel.com/News/AUGUST2006Newsletter.pdf http://www.gardenweasel.com/News/AUGUST2006Newsletter.pdf [PDF] In [Dean, of Segway fame] Kamen's opening statement he noted that some people might call him a "Patent Troll" since he now limits his activities to developing product ideas with the sole purpose of licensing them, but doesn't try to manufacture or market them. He believes that large companies are much better suited to manufacture and market products than to develop new products. He is better suited for developing these new products than manufacturing or marketing them. He made a very strong point that the larger companies had most of the resources in his business dealings and didn't really need patent protection. On the other hand, his patent for his intellectual property was the only thing that he had on his side of the table. He concluded his opening remarks by saying, “ . . .the patent system was intended to help everybody to be able to participate in innovation."

tedjedbed 18y ago
Sure, but I think there's a big difference between an innovative company actively designing and licensing technology–and a company being formed solely for the purpose of sitting on patents until they can sue a company for infringement. Maybe I'm incorrect, but in the web 1.0 days, it seems patents were approved which are overly-broad ... when you're simply conducting industry-specific business over the internet using standard technology and media, how does that pass the non-obvious test?
- jmackinn 18y ago
  Have you considered the idea of licensing the patent from them?
  - opticksversi 18y ago
    http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=427621 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=427621
    - jmackinn 18y ago
      Thanks. From reading those comments I should clarify my comment a bit more. I don't suggest they make any contact, I am just wondering if they have considered the idea of licensing. I think that broad sweeping software patents are a result of the patent system not truly understanding modern computers but I do think there is an important place for the patent system to protect developers of new technologies. Sometimes, I believe that the idea of licensing gets lost behind the abuse of software patents in general.

tedjedbed 18y ago

Sure, but I think there's a big difference between an innovative company actively designing and licensing technology–and a company being formed solely for the purpose of sitting on patents until they can sue a company for infringement. Maybe I'm incorrect, but in the web 1.0 days, it seems patents were approved which are overly-broad ... when you're simply conducting industry-specific business over the internet using standard technology and media, how does that pass the non-obvious test?

jmackinn 18y ago
Have you considered the idea of licensing the patent from them?
- opticksversi 18y ago
  http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=427621 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=427621
  - jmackinn 18y ago
    Thanks. From reading those comments I should clarify my comment a bit more. I don't suggest they make any contact, I am just wondering if they have considered the idea of licensing. I think that broad sweeping software patents are a result of the patent system not truly understanding modern computers but I do think there is an important place for the patent system to protect developers of new technologies. Sometimes, I believe that the idea of licensing gets lost behind the abuse of software patents in general.