What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
CNET Top Weekly Download for Free Anti-Virus view!
free.avg.com - 2.4 million people a week get AVG Anti-Virus Free, for the best protection against web threats.
38 Comments
- Blacksoth, on 11/01/2008, -5/+38Good. This patent nonsense is just following in-step with the copyright nonsense.
- InspectorGadget, on 11/01/2008, -1/+16Bilski didn't eliminate method patents, it merely eliminated the State Street precedent that caused courts to review the grant of method patents differently than the grant of other patents. Hey FastCompany, please hire an actual lawyer to write about legal issues, kthxbye.
- LittleDas, on 11/01/2008, -3/+13Good.
- Gustav, on 11/01/2008, -2/+12It is excellent news for consumers, because it opens everything up to competition.
- sp89, on 11/01/2008, -12/+22Apple do something worthless? Impossible.
- Nephersir7, on 11/01/2008, -3/+12http://www.geekologie.com/2007/12/03/urinal-headre ...
- Devine122, on 11/01/2008, -3/+12Good for you, bad for Apple.
- Micrll, on 11/01/2008, -1/+8The article has a quote “On the other hand, if we want innovation in an information age, we need to be able to patent this stuff. It comes down to a question of determining the right standard of eligibility.” In my opinion, not really, innovation will come regardless its not like a company is going to stop developing new things simply because they can't become the sole and whole owners of a methodological idea. What is the other option don't develop at all? Companies will just have to be competitive, they may think up a idea and people copy it but that does not change the fact that they were first and most likely understand the concept the best. Additionally I think more innovation may come simply due to the fact that people will be more willing to try and improve on existing methods and products because they know they won't be patent sued into oblivion.
- lalalalamppost, on 11/01/2008, -0/+6Method patents are eliminated? Who the ***** wrote this summary. Method patents have NOT been eliminated.
The Bilski decision is more complicated than that. Many software and method patents will survive this decision, at least THIS OPINION. WHo knows what the Supreme Ct will do on appeal.
For ***** sake people, don't get your legal advice from digg. - punkcat, on 11/01/2008, -2/+7nah Apple most likely likes it too, you have to file these patents to keep people from suing you.
not necessarily for want to corner an idea but because you have to.
*i think Apple was mentioned here to get hits for their article not any real reason to single them out. - GoneFishing, on 11/01/2008, -0/+5Thank god someone actually knows what the Bilski case is about. Business Methods patent will be here to stay.
- joesmosax, on 11/01/2008, -2/+6Fantastic news...patenting software is stifling innovation.
My fear is, it's only a matter of time before they find a way around the new rules... - dfeifer, on 11/01/2008, -0/+3HERE HERE
The current patent/trademark system in the united states is a joke and is a roadblock to innovation. The whole system needs to be revamped.. - olenick, on 11/01/2008, -2/+5Method patents were ridiculous, serving exactly the opposite public purpose that patent laws were set up to encourage (advancing science). I guess the value of the patent portfolios of the patent trolls has vaporized faster than the value of a Lehman Brothers bond.
- ryanonfire, on 11/01/2008, -0/+3What the hell is this apple product? http://www.google.com/patents?id=pQ6pAAAAEBAJ&prin ...
- lalalalamppost, on 11/01/2008, -0/+2Actually it only eliminated the TEST used in the State Street opinion and did not, in my reading of it, weigh in clearly enough on the rest of the State Street opinion. [i.e. whether it would have come out the same way under the current test.]
But I agree with you w.r.t. the FastCompany article. - bnolsen, on 11/02/2008, -0/+2Problem is that Apple likes to send out cease an desist letters quite often. I wouldn't consider them *nice guys* in any case.
- bnolsen, on 11/02/2008, -0/+2Apparently it costs ~$40k or so to file a patent. To be frankly honest with you, a one or two man operation isn't likely to just have $40k in cash sitting around to patent some idea they pulled out of their ass. They have to take this idea they pulled out of their ass and bring it to market. Unfortunately while they are doing this some big established company may take that idea and fork over the $40k (to them chump change) and claim that as their own idea. Guess who's screwed in this case?
- dfeifer, on 11/01/2008, -0/+1hehe.. I would really hate to say how many times i have done that.. 1 too many hefewiesen at the pub downtown, the sigh of relief as you balance yourself between your head and feet keeping your arms steady.. Sounds like a sound invention to me..
- Blacksoth, on 11/03/2008, -0/+1"Some of this patent crap is pure ***** designed to make it difficult for others to compete in a product category. That's not what patents were designed for, they are supposed to reward innovators, not harm competition and enable lawyers to sue anyone they think has money."
Insert the word "copyright" for "patent" and that's exactly what's happenning in the copyright department, hence my comment.
Unless you're arguing that enacting laws after the fact that make it legal is "valid by default". - mrsteveman1, on 11/01/2008, -2/+3At least copyrights are valid by default, its just that efforts to protect them are going way way too far.
Some of this patent crap is pure ***** designed to make it difficult for others to compete in a product category. That's not what patents were designed for, they are supposed to reward innovators, not harm competition and enable lawyers to sue anyone they think has money. - atgmac, on 11/01/2008, -0/+1Looks like a 1G iPod nano.
- GarryBarker, on 11/02/2008, -0/+1Apple puts in a lot of time and effort into design and R&D, it's absurd that companies like Microsoft and Sony can steal technology and ideas from them and use it in their own products.
- homercles337, on 11/02/2008, -0/+1Hi! Im a Macophile! Digg me down you tools please!
- catpuke, on 11/01/2008, -4/+5Why do pro-Microsoft people care so much about Apple ?
- inactive, on 11/01/2008, -0/+1The most useful invention I recall in a long while...ergonomic in the extreme. Very European.
- gkiltz, on 11/02/2008, -0/+0That's typical
Fewer than 1 in every 1000 well-researched patents taken out by large corporations ever turn a positive cash flow!!
There is not, and never has been a $600.00 patent awarded to an individual that could not be busted with sufficiently diligent research in sufficiently obscure places.
one of MANY excellent sources on how to make money on a technological device while staying as far away from the patent process as possible can be found at www.tinaja.com
Be sure to read "The Case Against Patents" on this site! - phxdigg, on 01/10/2009, -0/+0Wrong to all you uncreative communist thieves who are happy about the disintegration of property rights. One doesn't just wake up with brilliant ideas, which most of you probably never had a great idea. It's take months or years to develop a great idea. Same with pharmaceuticals. If you can come up with a few thousand hours creating a new idea, you can also come up with angel investment that will front you the patent fees for a piece of the action. America has all these great ideas that you see on the retail shelves because of property rights -- not in spite of them. You get rid of property rights -- namely patent rights -- and you KILL great innovation because people stop trying, or they just keep their ideas to themselves just out of spite. And YES -- "they" will stop innovating great things and just create mediocre short-term ho-hum products that all look the same and leave us bereft of product passion. No more iPods or iPhones -- just ordinary run of the mill devices that all look the same, just like they do in Eastern Europe. Stop feeling your way though arguments and compare the history of countries that have strong patent and property rights to those that do not. BIG DIFFERENCE! They need to be more like us -- not us more like them.
- Virgule, on 11/01/2008, -1/+1I applaud this. That's all there is to say.
- psysop, on 11/01/2008, -2/+2But how does this affect William Shatner?
- TwistedSilver, on 11/01/2008, -1/+1Because of someone who's head is just as shiny as a smudgy mirror, and loves hanging out in the MSFT corporate "sauna".
xD lol. - JonnyIsElectric, on 11/01/2008, -6/+1pinch punch first of the month
- inactive, on 11/01/2008, -7/+1BRAAAAAAAAINSSSSSSS
- inactive, on 11/01/2008, -7/+1***** Apple and their dumbass patents and their rich dumbass customers
- homercles337, on 11/01/2008, -8/+1Apple has never been a company of innovation. They take risks because they know their zealot following will buy their ***** regardless of how poorly designed it is. Every single "innovation" they have "developed" has been previously developed. They dont innovate they copy/pasta with ***** that reasonable companies avoid because of risk. If you have stock in Apple, SELL! This business model will not last long.
- Khast, on 11/01/2008, -9/+2I think I will patent 0 and 1....just so I can reap the royalties.....let's see a DVD has 4.7 Billion bits.......
....
4) profit! - Codename, on 11/01/2008, -12/+1Who else thought the title said "Apple's Latest Parents, and Why They May Be Worthless"?
- Gbee, on 11/01/2008, -17/+0Apple. Blah...right now I'm too overwelmed to learn that You Suck at Photoshop web tutorials was the brainchild of Dane Cook all along..this you gotta see:
http://digg.com/design/Donnie_Hoyle_s_True_Identit ...
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 