On The Insider: Britney's Bikini-Clad Top 10
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 17 of 42:
Next »
« Previous
having a patent is not defend it ... bad patents are not valid
Personally I think they are just too lazy at the patent office to check for prior art.

Actually, its not the patent offices responsibility to check for prior art. It would take them forever to process every patent if they had to do that. That's what the applicant pays lawyers for ... so, if MS's lawers badly advise MS as to the existance of prior art and MS files for a patent on fraudulent claims its only a matter of time before they are held accountable. Problem with MS is they have deep pocketc and could tie up most folks in court for years proving that "TODO" lists existed prior to MS's deep R&D efforts to "INNOVATE" a better means of conducting a SW development process.

Obviously this is a bogus patent, but can you afford to fend off six months of legal crap to enforce your right to use a TODO tag in your JAVA code?
Posted by: oldskool   Posted on: 06/08/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

I would like to patent the following things:  kb0old1978 | 06/08/04
How about  vferrara | 06/08/04
I am just waiting for them to try for:  g.brandenstein@... | 06/08/04
has anyone patented the process of "whipping cream"?  oldskool | 06/08/04
I see that and raise the bar  nucrash | 06/08/04
PLEASE DO NOT GIVE THEM MORE IDEAS!  michael-t | 06/08/04
Hmmm I smell a patent here  NemesisNL | 06/08/04
I would like to:  Suicida| | 06/08/04
This is innovation  jdunn_z | 06/08/04
am I dreaming or have I been using this for years ... ?  oldskool | 06/08/04
Must be  ParadigmOdyssey | 06/09/04
Look at the dates  uno@... | 06/09/04
Someone needs to fire these guys at the patent office.  Arrg | 06/08/04
It's not lazy  IT_User | 06/08/04
Management's proposal  IT_User | 06/08/04
No worries man  Arrg | 06/08/04
having a patent is not defend it ... bad patents are not valid  oldskool | 06/08/04
Actually, it IS the examiner's job  IT_User | 06/08/04
the patent itself needs to reference prior art and differentiate  oldskool | 06/08/04
Tesla  MrMoo | 06/09/04
Love to see a list of the silly MS, Apple, and Sony  FilledOut | 06/08/04
Cuculidae  pj-xmesh | 06/08/04
Microsoft checks off patent win  Loverock Davidson | 06/08/04
Why not..  LinuxHippie | 06/08/04
Here's what's really going on....  tic swayback | 06/08/04
so we need to put the future of SW development in MS's benovolent hands?  oldskool | 06/08/04
reality?  myndlon@... | 06/08/04
I agree  seosamh_z | 06/09/04
I think you are right for a couple of reasons.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/09/04
WOW How Smart They Are In Redmond.  RobertoSalazar | 06/08/04
C'mon already!  DB_z | 06/08/04
Blatant trademark violation  tic swayback | 06/08/04
reins are open still, but MS did patent pulling on string"!  oldskool | 06/08/04
And some other nitwit wants to abolish the FCC?  kd5auq | 06/08/04
What a tremendous  michael-t | 06/08/04
MS : Advanced Computer Science  Joe Frisco | 06/08/04
I realize that...  rock06r | 06/08/04
(NT) LMAO  zijiang | 06/08/04
Prior Art - GExperts in Delphi  deanh | 06/09/04
MS Strategy to stop Open Source (Linux)  km4hr@... | 06/09/04
You are closer to the truth than you can imagine.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/09/04
The ultimate money maker  wlewis@... | 06/23/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here