8 ms·

> The problem is patents: No, patents are fine. The problem is that current patent laws enable patent trolls. If we could find a way to eradicate patent trolls

> The problem is patents: No, patents are fine. The problem is that current patent laws enable patent trolls. If we could find a way to eradicate patent trolls while preserving patents, their intent would be served much better. For example, you should only be able to acquire patents if you can prove you have a business pertinent to those patents. This kind of measure would instantly kill all patent trolls.

wlesieutre 12y ago
They do have a business pertinent to those patents! Just not to the inventions covered by said patents...
chongli 12y ago
This kind of measure would instantly kill all patent trolls. And anyone else who files for a patent but is unable to bring their idea to market in the form of a product or service. This includes (but is not limited to) private inventors, universities, research institutions and even large companies such as ARM Holdings plc.
- bjt 12y ago
  Couldn't agree more. The focus on non-practicing entities is misplaced. There's no reason we shouldn't incentivize inventors who come up with great ideas so they can sell them to others who have the skills to bring them to market. I think the more appropriate distinctions between good patents and bad are in the subject matter of the claims themselves (e.g. the novelty and non-obviousness requirements). Thankfully, the Supreme Court is tightening this up lately.
  - chongli 12y ago
    Thankfully, the Supreme Court is tightening this up lately. I'm not so sure about this. The Supreme Court is attempting to define and apply standards that some experts consider arbitrary and highly subjective. One example is the attempt to make a distinction between a mathematical function and a novel software algorithm. It almost seems like the distinction is made based upon whether or not the particular justice writing the opinion is able to understand it. Some might even go so far as to say that only magic is patentable (recalling the oft-repeated Arthur C. Clarke quote).

wlesieutre 12y ago

They do have a business pertinent to those patents! Just not to the inventions covered by said patents...

chongli 12y ago

This kind of measure would instantly kill all patent trolls. And anyone else who files for a patent but is unable to bring their idea to market in the form of a product or service. This includes (but is not limited to) private inventors, universities, research institutions and even large companies such as ARM Holdings plc.

bjt 12y ago
Couldn't agree more. The focus on non-practicing entities is misplaced. There's no reason we shouldn't incentivize inventors who come up with great ideas so they can sell them to others who have the skills to bring them to market. I think the more appropriate distinctions between good patents and bad are in the subject matter of the claims themselves (e.g. the novelty and non-obviousness requirements). Thankfully, the Supreme Court is tightening this up lately.
- chongli 12y ago
  Thankfully, the Supreme Court is tightening this up lately. I'm not so sure about this. The Supreme Court is attempting to define and apply standards that some experts consider arbitrary and highly subjective. One example is the attempt to make a distinction between a mathematical function and a novel software algorithm. It almost seems like the distinction is made based upon whether or not the particular justice writing the opinion is able to understand it. Some might even go so far as to say that only magic is patentable (recalling the oft-repeated Arthur C. Clarke quote).