 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
>> The other problem with a lot of patents is they're not "enabling". This
>> means they don't tell you how to build the actual device.
>
> How about patents which require fictional laws of physics in order to
> work? http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6960975.html
I'm not enough of a physicist to know that's "fictional". It certainly
sounds weird, but then, so does the Casimir effect.
> This kind of patent would never be granted in Europe (at least in theory)
> because of the requirement that a *working* prototype of the device must
> exist.
Is that still a requirement there? Here they dropped that, so you have
people patenting things like genetic crosses between goats and humans that
nobody knows how to actually create, and crap like that.
Even if you have a working prototype, tho, you should still need to reveal
how it works in order to get a patent. That's the point of the patent, after
all.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Or, to put it another way...
>>
>> JPEG, MPEG, and MP3 are all patented. That doesn't stop you from using
>> DFT for other purposes.
But what if I use the DFT to compress an image, but in a slightly
different way to JPEG? Or if I compress the data in exactly the same
way, but format the output file slightly differently? And just how
different does it have to be?
> And (Hi Andrew!) CDMA is patented for cell phones, but maybe not for
> other processes. You could probably use CDMA to deliver cable TV without
> running into the same patents you would using it for cell phones.
Question: If CDMA is patented, how come cell phones exist?
> Now, another problem with "software" patents are that they're hard to
> research.
Well, there is that too.
> Then again, I heard of a very expensive patent case where basically
> backoff/retry was patented for a particular yet wide-spread purpose, and
> the patent was upheld. Which seems rather wrong to me, as it really was
> the obvious way to do it. I think they need a test like taking a random
> professional and asking "If you had to solve problem X, how would you
> solve it?" And if the person gives the solution in the patent, throw it
> out.
I wonder, how well do legal professionals actually understand computers?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> But what if I use the DFT to compress an image, but in a slightly
> different way to JPEG? Or if I compress the data in exactly the same
> way, but format the output file slightly differently? And just how
> different does it have to be?
That's why you read the patent. If you do every clause of one of the claims
of the patent, then you're infringing the patent. Take a look at "claim 1"
of a patent some time.
> Question: If CDMA is patented, how come cell phones exist?
Because the patent owner licenses the patents.
> I wonder, how well do legal professionals actually understand computers?
That's why you need an engineering degree to be a patent officer in the US.
You have basically people who took a bachelor's in computers and a masters
in law, or vice versa.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> But what if I use the DFT to compress an image, but in a slightly
>> different way to JPEG? Or if I compress the data in exactly the same
>> way, but format the output file slightly differently? And just how
>> different does it have to be?
>
> That's why you read the patent.
Or, in my case, you just avoid even trying in the first place.
>> Question: If CDMA is patented, how come cell phones exist?
>
> Because the patent owner licenses the patents.
Interesting. I thought the whole point of a patent is to financially
cripple your opponents so you then have the whole market to yourself and
can then charge extortionate prices for a poor quality product...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>
> Interesting. I thought the whole point of a patent is to financially
> cripple your opponents so you then have the whole market to yourself and
> can then charge extortionate prices for a poor quality product...
>
If you want the market to be created, you'll need to sell those
licenses. That's eg. how Sony messed up with Minidisc - they kept MD too
long for just themselves and the prices high, so that CD-R's (and later
MP3 -players) went ahead.
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Interesting. I thought the whole point of a patent is to financially
>> cripple your opponents so you then have the whole market to yourself and
>> can then charge extortionate prices for a poor quality product...
>>
>
> If you want the market to be created, you'll need to sell those
> licenses. That's eg. how Sony messed up with Minidisc - they kept MD too
> long for just themselves and the prices high, so that CD-R's (and later
> MP3 -players) went ahead.
Depends on the product. There's only one company that makes Viagra, and
last I heard they're doing pretty damned well...
I would have thought some company would come up with the idea for a
cellphone, patent it, and have the entire world market to themselves,
keeping it too expensive for anybody anywhere to ever use. I'm puzzled
as to how this didn't happen. That's what patents are for, after all.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> I would have thought some company would come up with the idea for a
> cellphone, patent it, and have the entire world market to themselves,
Why would you think that didn't happen? Cell phones have been around for 50
years or so.
Patents expire, you know.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 06/25/09 13:04, Warp wrote:
> How about patents which require fictional laws of physics in order to
> work? http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6960975.html
Made my day.
Am I missing something? I thought for something to be patented, you
need a working model. Did that change? And what would be the rationale
of not requiring it?
--
Marge: "When I married you, I knew we wouldn't live in luxury."
Homer: "And I kept that vow."
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 06/25/09 15:50, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Because the patent owner licenses the patents.
>
> Interesting. I thought the whole point of a patent is to financially
> cripple your opponents so you then have the whole market to yourself and
> can then charge extortionate prices for a poor quality product...
I assume you're not joking.
The point of a patent is to promote the knowledge of technology. The
government makes you an offer: Make your design public, and they'll give
you exclusive rights to it for a limited time. Sooner or later, the
patent will expire and not be renewed, at which point anyone can make
it. Also, even while the patent is valid, people can view the design of
the product, and it may inspire them to make a totally different product
- thus benefiting (?) society.
The requirement to disclose the design a product may not be amenable to
a company. So sometimes they don't patent it, but maintain it as an
industry secret. I'm told that stuff like the Coca Cola recipe is such
an example.
--
Marge: "When I married you, I knew we wouldn't live in luxury."
Homer: "And I kept that vow."
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I would have thought some company would come up with the idea for a
>> cellphone, patent it, and have the entire world market to themselves,
>
> Why would you think that didn't happen? Cell phones have been around for
> 50 years or so.
>
> Patents expire, you know.
AFAIK, digital technology hasn't been around for 50 years, and an
analogue cell phone wouldn't be much use... I had assumed that's why
they exist now.
(OOC, does anybody know how long electricity has been around? I thought
it was comparatively new.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
