On The Insider: Regis Philbin Surgery Update
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 4 of 15:
Next »
« Previous
Agree in part
But I don't think Google had to pay the USPTO any more for this trivial patent than MS had to pay for the FAT patents (per patent).

There's no question that the US patent system is broken. Personally, I think that inasmuch as it doesn't fulfill the purposes embodied in the copyright clause, that it's unconstitutional as well.
Posted by: John L. Ries   Posted on: 12/13/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Google wins patent for search results page design  Loverock Davidson | 12/13/06
Normally I would agree  GuidingLight | 12/13/06
Design patents are questionable too  John L. Ries | 12/13/06
Agree in part  John L. Ries | 12/13/06
"veritable copies" ... like how Google copied Yahoo's IE7 page?  PB_z | 12/13/06
Sorry this was meant as a reply to the main article (NT)  PB_z | 12/13/06
Yeah, well...  nomorems | 12/14/06
What does my post have to do with MS?  PB_z | 12/14/06
Yeah and...  John Le'Brecage | 12/13/06
Re: Yeah and...  none none | 12/14/06
Flawed Patent approved..  thetruth_z | 12/14/06
Hmmmmm..... I don't know...  el1jones | 12/14/06
I agree. I think it opens the door  xuniL_z | 12/14/06
Yep, patent process is broken (nt)  Boot_Agnostic | 12/14/06
Lawyers on the go...  DarbyOhara | 12/14/06

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement
  • Smart Tech Expert advice on innovations in healthcare and the green technologies that make it happen. Find out more
  • Smart Business Discussion and advice on management issues that revolve around making your world smarter and more useful. More Smart Advice
  • Smart People The best and worst moves in the management and strategy trenches. Learn More