3 ms·
Exactly, my stance on software patents is that they do not necessarily cover the coder's method, it creates an entitlement to the result. Almost every software
by talmand 14y ago
Exactly, my stance on software patents is that they do not necessarily cover the coder's method, it creates an entitlement to the result. Almost every software patent I've seen doesn't mention specific code, it just covers the result. Meaning no one can ever come up with a similar system without the threat of being sued for patent infringement. So, even if someone had a better way to make a similar system, they more than likely will get sued. "I have a patent that covers software that checks licenses over a network; therefore you can never make software that checks licenses over a network without paying me money." How does that allow for someone to do "something else"?
- usea 14y agoThis isn't actually true. The summary of a patent is usually very broad, but if you read the full text it is very specific as to the method being patented. Media outlets portray patents as covering an entire concept, but really they only cover a narrow implementation of a concept.
- emmett 14y agoActually, this is often quite true for software patents. For a famous example, the Amazon one-click patent. It shouldn't be true, but it is, because patent examiners have done a very poor job screening software patents historically.