House votes to overhaul patent system

TalkBack 22 of 47:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

re: As a software patent holder...

"The truth is, the patent system has been good to me and my small company."

Just be glad none of the "big boys" have decided to take serious action. And be glad that you have patents as "ammunition" at all. Not all businesses enjoy that luxury.

IMHO a business should focus on being able to run fine without having to worry about the patent mess in the first place if they so desire.

"I think the key thing to hang on to here is that patents are meant to spur innovation, not make mega-corps more money or create patent holding houses that innovate and contribute nothing."

Agreed. IMHO, patents are about encouraging innovation, and that the product should make the money, not the patent.

"but it would create panic for corporate patent holders and the entire legal ecology built around them."

The panic will be temporary, and the long term benefits will be more than worth it. I'm not shedding any tears.

"Software patents should have a life of no more than 5 years for any reason. No extentions."

Agreed. Yeah, the patents are there to help - but it's ultimately up to the business to make the product work.

It may be worth it to allow a little bit of flexibility (but not too much!) when determining how long a patent will last. For example, a new design for part of a house will take much longer to implement than a new software algorithm. Some markets move faster than others.

"Must defend. Patents should be treated the same way a trademark is. When the holder knows it is being violated they hold a responsibility to defend it immediately."

Agreed. These "submarine patents" are a bit of a problem. I still can't believe Eolas had the gall to sue everybody for what had essentially become commonplace on the Internet.

"Software patents must be renewed on an annual basis with an ever increasing fee. If it's a good idea/concept and has a value, then the holder would surely be willing to spend the money for renewal."

Interesting idea. Also makes sense, since it provides a way for the patent office to pay for itself, relieving us of a small tax burden.

"Within two years of recieving a patent, it MUST be implemented in a product offered in the market, or the patent is automatically dropped."

Totally agreed. Patents are about products, not litigation. The purpose of a patent is to ensure a fair start in the market, not to act as ammunition against another company.

"Finally, establish a patent *court* where litigants are not allowed to drag the legal process out for years. Say a rule on the court that says that within one year of a patent suit being filed the court MUST rule."

Agreed, and quite frankly I'd like to see something like that for all types of court cases. Whatever happened to the 6th amendment anyways? How in the world are we getting cases that last for many, many years, and how in the world can they be considered "speedy?"

Posted by: CobraA1   Posted on: 09/10/07 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• Email Security and Archiving - Clearer in the Cloud Google The time is NOW for businesses and organizations of all sizes to implement ... Download Now
• VMware Infrastructure: A Guide to Bottom-Line Benefits VMware Frustrated by the costs of maintain ever larger data centers?or building ... Download Now