[News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies - Linux ; -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Microsoft patent applications published on 25 September 2008 ,----[ Quote ] | 52 US patent applications published on 25 September 2008 and assigned to | Microsoft `---- http://www.latestpatents.com/2008/09...eptember-2008/ That's all that Microsoft has left ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 40

Thread: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

  1. [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Microsoft patent applications published on 25 September 2008

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | 52 US patent applications published on 25 September 2008 and assigned to
    | Microsoft
    `----

    http://www.latestpatents.com/2008/09...eptember-2008/

    That's all that Microsoft has left now. Page up, page down, double-clicks,
    smiley faces...

    Intellectual Property Rights and Software Protection - A Programmer’s View

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Computer programs, mathematical methods, discoveries, schemes, rules or
    | methods for performing mental acts and methods for presentation of
    | information are excluded from patentability to the extent that they do not
    | have an impact in the real world. In effect for software, the computer
    | program cannot be claimed on its own - there must be a ‘technical effect’.
    | The program must facilitate some other process, rather than embody the
    | process itself.
    `----

    http://enewsmediamagazine.com/?p=1640


    Recent:

    Checking in on Nathan Myhrvold

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | I'd suggest the business be called Intellectual Vultures' ... because that is
    | exactly what Nathan is bringing to the table - nothing. This business model
    | stifles and prevents creative idea, and is yet another made up securities
    | model that preys on other people's legitimate hard work.
    |
    | When he was at Microsoft, he had zero practical ideas and I see he's still
    | doing the same, only this time, he's screwing the whole public. This business
    | is living on the backs of other people because they don't know how to spell
    | the word ‘innovation'. How about coming up with an original and useful idea
    | and earn it the old fashion way?
    |
    | Nathan should be ashamed of this practice and he should be investigated by
    | the FTC for predatory business practices.
    `----

    http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/m...asp?source=rss


    Nathan Myhrvold’s Patent Extortion Fund Is Reaping Hundreds Of Millions of
    Dollars

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Don’t blame Nathan Myhrvold for taking advantage of the culture of rampant
    | patent litigation in this country. He is only doing what large companies with
    | vast patent portfolios such as IBM and Microsoft do on a daily basis: use the
    | threat of patent infringement litigation to strike lucrative patent licensing
    | deals. Except Myhrvold, who used to be Bill Gates’ right-hand man at
    | Microsoft during the 1990s, does it through his patent-gobbling fund,
    | Intellectual Ventures.
    `----

    http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/09/17...ns-of-dollars/


    Invention Capitalism & the Law: Checking in on Nathan Myhrvold

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Myhrvold told the WSJ that he acknowledges facing resistance from companies
    | he targets for licenses. But his patent inventory gives him leverage to
    | extract settlements without litigation. “I say, ‘I can’t afford to sue you on
    | all of these, and you can’t afford to defend on all these,’” he said.
    `----

    http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/09/17/...than-myhrvold/


    Nathan Myhrvold: Alpha patent troll?

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Former Microsoft exec Nathan Myhrvold has been collecting patents, extracting
    | fees from technology companies via his company Intellectual Ventures. Is
    | Myhrvold a patent troll with tech cred?
    |
    | The Wall Street Journal has a long account of Myhrvold’s patent collecting
    | efforts and how he is winning multimillion dollar payments from the likes of
    | Verizon and Cisco. These payments are top secret material, but Myhrvold’s
    | firm is the one reaping the rewards. Intellectual Ventures has more than
    | 20,000 patents. In many respects, Myhrvold is just a patent trader. A few
    | lawsuits could define him as a troll quickly though.
    `----

    http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=10069


    Tech Guru Riles the Industry

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Over the past few years, the former Microsoft Corp. executive has quietly
    | amassed a trove of 20,000-plus patents and patent applications related to
    | everything from lasers to computer chips. He now ranks among the world's
    | largest patent-holders -- and is using that clout to press tech giants to
    | sign some of the costliest patent-licensing deals ever negotiated.
    `----

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122161127802345821.html


    Patent startup gains high profile backing

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | John Amster, one of two former Intellectual Ventures executives that formed
    | RPX, said he will not detail the company's business model or customers until
    | October. However he did say RPX will acquire patents in a broad range of
    | technology and e-commerce areas, especially when the patents are being
    | asserted or involved in litigation.
    `----

    http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/s...leID=210602186


    Transcript: Myhrvold of Intellectual Ventures

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Nathan Myhrvold: The genesis of this idea was when I was at Microsoft. We had
    | a problem with patent liability. All these people were coming to sue us or
    | demand payment. And Bill (Gates) asked me to think about if there was a
    | solution. This is what I came up with.
    |
    | WSJ: So you think that you're actually protecting companies from more
    | settlements or bigger payments down the road?
    `----

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122142717791833671.html


    We doctor your patents, so be patent!

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Unlike most other pure licensing companies, Intellectual Ventures hasn’t
    | filed patent-infringement lawsuits to help force settlements. But the group
    | lobbying on behalf of tech companies in Washington, the Coalition for Patent
    | Fairness — which includes several companies that have been approached for
    | licensing deals by Intellectual Ventures — says it is only a matter of
    | time. “Since these thousands of patents only give [Intellectual Ventures] the
    | right to stop others from making products, through lawsuits, it is obvious
    | what they intend to do,” the group said in a statement.
    |
    | [...]
    |
    | As with short sellers, large companies don't like plays that can shake them
    | up and expose their inadequacies, and will spend large amounts to PR /
    | lobby / legislate them away - and as any small player who has tried to
    | enforce patent abuse by large companies knows, it's virtually impossible to
    | win and ruinously expensive to fight. So in that respect, aggregation is a
    | good thing. Its hard to tell from this article if its just part of the PR war
    | or whether there has been a real step up in the shakedown.
    `----

    http://broadstuff.com/archives/1246-...e-patent!.html


    Reforming the Patent System

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Intellectual Ventures and its ilk are arguably the single biggest risk to
    | America's continued leadership in technology and innovation. As dsquared
    | elegantly put it in a comment here in May, the company might do a bit of R,
    | but it doesn't do any D. Instead, it acts as a brake on any company wanting
    | to do substantive R&D of its own, since there's a good chance Intellectual
    | Ventures will have got there first, patented the idea, and then just decided
    | to sit on it until somebody dares to violate it.
    `----

    http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs...ystem?tid=true


    Microsoft and Pioneer Enter Into Patent Cross-Licensing Agreement to Foster
    Mutual Innovation in Consumer Technology

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Although the contents of the agreement, including the specific financial
    | terms, are confidential, the parties indicated that Microsoft is being
    | compensated by Pioneer.
    `----

    http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/p...PioneerPR.mspx


    Acacia tops troll litigaition league

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Acacia Technologies is the most litigious non-practising entity/troll (delete
    | according to preference) in the United States. According to research done by
    | PatentFreedom, which is featured in an article to be published in the next
    | issue of IAM, Acacia has been involved in a total of 308 cases in the US
    | courts, 239 of which have been filed since 2003. In second place is Rates
    | Technology Inc, which has been involved in 130 cases – although just 38 have
    | been over the last six years.
    `----

    http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/Det...6-32a96383071e


    Ideas Are Everywhere... So Why Do We Limit Them?

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Gladwell uses this to talk up what Myhrvold is doing, suggesting that
    | Intellectual Ventures is really about continuing that process, getting those
    | ideas out there -- but he misses the much bigger point: if these ideas are
    | the natural progression, almost guaranteed to be discovered by someone sooner
    | or later, why do we give a monopoly on these ideas to a single discoverer?
    | Myhrvold's whole business model is about monopolizing all of these ideas and
    | charging others (who may have discovered them totally independently) to
    | actually do something with them. Yet, if Gladwell's premise is correct (and
    | there's plenty of evidence included in the article), then Myhrvold's efforts
    | shouldn't be seen as a big deal. After all, if it wasn't Myhrvold and his
    | friends doing it, others would very likely come up with the same thing sooner
    | or later.
    |
    | This is especially highlighted in one anecdote in the article, of Myhrvold
    | holding a dinner with a bunch of smart people... and an attorney. The group
    | spent dinner talking about a bunch of different random ideas, with no real
    | goal or purpose -- just "chewing the rag" as one participant put it. But the
    | next day the attorney approached them with a typewritten description of 36
    | different inventions that were potentially patentable out of the dinner. When
    | a random "chewing the rag" conversation turns up 36 monopolies, something is
    | wrong. Those aren't inventions that deserve a monopoly.
    `----

    http://techdirt.com/articles/20080507/0114581051.shtml


    Related:

    Who is the world's biggest patent troll?

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | In two consecutive days, The Wall Street Journal presented two different
    | answers. The first is not surprising: Intellectual Ventures, the brainchild
    | of ex-Microsoft executive Nathan Myhrvold. It's now out "to raise as much as
    | $1 billion to help develop and patent inventions, many of them from
    | universities in Asia." *
    `----

    http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13505_1-9...=2547-1_3-0-20


    Playing Microsoft Patent Poker

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | This time though, while Ballmer slinks away to try to con … convince people
    | that Microsoft Unified Communications somehow offers people more than what
    | Cisco's VOIP (voice over IP) been offering customers for years, a patent
    | attack finally launches at Linux. Specifically, IP Innovation, a subsidiary
    | of Acacia Technologies Group, has filed a patent infringement claim against
    | Linux distributors Novell and Red Hat. * *
    |
    | So was it just timing, or was it something more? Let's take a look at the
    | players. *
    `----

    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759...129TX1K0000616


    Top Ten Patent Trolls of 2007

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | 3. Acacia. I didn't start tracking Acacia carefully until the summer. But
    | still, on my blog I have reported on over two dozen lawsuits brought by
    | Acacia this year, against more than 235 defendants. That's in addition to the
    | over 200 lawsuits Acacia filed in previous years against hundreds and
    | hundreds of defendants. And that's not including the two lawsuits (at least)
    | Acacia has filed in December against 20 more defendants (yes, Acacia, I'm
    | watching you). Acacia's business model, as a publicly traded company, is to
    | accumulate patents and sue as many companies as possible in order to extract
    | licenses. They have a market cap of over 275 million - that pays for a lot of
    | lawsuits. Unlike other trolls, Acacia tends to not focus on one court in
    | particular, although they have sampled the Eastern District of Texas more
    | this year than in the past.
    `----

    http://trolltracker.blogspot.com/200...s-of-2007.html
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkjcEtYACgkQU4xAY3RXLo7QKQCfSJ1AUGNfKn eFnIOSvfDJ0Jpz
    jwQAn0yRTsCLtLqcToHaLZZpnXPslXLA
    =ujF+
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  2. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    In article <1638903.kEgvmSkeKt@schestowitz.com>,
    Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    > Checking in on Nathan Myhrvold
    >
    > ,----[ Quote ]
    > | I'd suggest the business be called Intellectual Vultures' ...
    > | because that is exactly what Nathan is bringing to the table -
    > | nothing. This business model stifles and prevents creative idea,
    > | and is yet another made up securities model that preys on other
    > | people's legitimate hard work.
    > |
    > | When he was at Microsoft, he had zero practical ideas and I see
    > | he's still doing the same, only this time, he's screwing the whole
    > | public. This business is living on the backs of other people
    > | because they don't know how to spell the word ‘innovation'. How
    > | about coming up with an original and useful idea and earn it the
    > | old fashion way?
    > |
    > | Nathan should be ashamed of this practice and he should be
    > | investigated by the FTC for predatory business practices.
    > `----
    >
    > http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/m...asp?source=rss


    Note that Roy is not quoting the author of the cited article, but rather
    an anonymous comment to the article posted by an unregistered user.

    > Invention Capitalism & the Law: Checking in on Nathan Myhrvold
    >
    > ,----[ Quote ]
    > | Myhrvold told the WSJ that he acknowledges facing resistance from
    > | companies he targets for licenses. But his patent inventory gives
    > | him leverage to extract settlements without litigation. “I say, ‘I
    > | can’t afford to sue you on all of these, and you can’t afford to
    > | defend on all these,’” he said.
    > `----
    >
    > http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/09/17/...-checking-in-o
    > n-nathan-myhrvold/


    How is that different from when, say, someone rips off an artist's work,
    the artist asks them to stop, and they resist? Companies, just like
    individuals, prefer to pay the least possible for anything they use.
    Why do you think it is newsworthy that companies would prefer not to pay
    for patents they are using?

    --
    --Tim Smith

  3. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    Roy Schestowitz writes:

    > Checking in on Nathan Myhrvold
    >
    > ,----[ Quote ]
    > | I'd suggest the business be called Intellectual Vultures' ... because that is
    > | exactly what Nathan is bringing to the table - nothing. This business model
    > | stifles and prevents creative idea, and is yet another made up securities
    > | model that preys on other people's legitimate hard work.
    > |
    > | When he was at Microsoft, he had zero practical ideas and I see he's still
    > | doing the same, only this time, he's screwing the whole public. This business
    > | is living on the backs of other people because they don't know how to spell
    > | the word ‘innovation'. How about coming up with an original and useful idea
    > | and earn it the old fashion way?
    > |
    > | Nathan should be ashamed of this practice and he should be investigated by
    > | the FTC for predatory business practices.
    > `----
    >
    > http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/m...asp?source=rss


    Where does it say that in the article you liar? More disinformation
    tactics from you.

    Heel Linonut, heel! Come to Roy's defence or do you think his quoting
    stuff from anonymous bloggers as if its part of the original article is
    ok?

    Hell, he might as well quote like Phil da Lick or, chuckle,
    "Owl". Hmm Or did he ? ....



  4. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Hadron wrote:
    > thousands if not millions to develop certain SW packages. And during
    > that phase "ideas" come up which need to be protected or your
    > competitors will lift them and use them and possibly beat you to market



    Oh, and if your competitors steal your ideas before you get your product
    to market then either your company has sprung a leak and deserves to
    fail or *shock horror* the idea wasn't that revolutionary and they came
    up with it on their own. There's only so many ways to skin a cat you know.

  5. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    Phil Da Lick! wrote:

    > Quack drooled:
    >>
    >> thousands if not millions to develop certain SW packages. And during
    >> that phase "ideas" come up which need to be protected or your
    >> competitors will lift them and use them and possibly beat you to market

    >
    >Oh, and if your competitors steal your ideas before you get your product
    >to market then either your company has sprung a leak and deserves to
    >fail or *shock horror* the idea wasn't that revolutionary and they came
    >up with it on their own. There's only so many ways to skin a cat you know.


    The trolling fsckwit thinks that companies should be "protected" from
    others coming-up-with the same or similar ideas independently. That's
    not how it works.

    Why can't the stupid POS understand that copyright laws, together with
    keeping the code closed and proprietary, are all the fair protection a
    company needs. If someone else gets and same idea and writes their
    own code for it, there's nothing wrong with that. Duh.


  6. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    "Phil Da Lick!" writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >> thousands if not millions to develop certain SW packages. And during
    >> that phase "ideas" come up which need to be protected or your
    >> competitors will lift them and use them and possibly beat you to market

    >
    >
    > Oh, and if your competitors steal your ideas before you get your
    > product to market then either your company has sprung a leak and
    > deserves to fail or *shock horror* the idea wasn't that revolutionary
    > and they came up with it on their own. There's only so many ways to
    > skin a cat you know.


    That has to be the dumbest phrase since Owl last opened his mouth.

    If they have their idea stolen then they they deserve to fail? I dont
    think I need to add any more. You're plea of insanity is enough to
    anyone following this thread.

    You really are a knob jockey if you believe what you wrote above.

    --
    "True. Due to a lack of competition, there essentially have been no
    improvements to Microsoft's operating system and office software. It
    just works."
    -- High Plains Thumper in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  7. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Hadron wrote:
    > "Phil Da Lick!" writes:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>> thousands if not millions to develop certain SW packages. And during
    >>> that phase "ideas" come up which need to be protected or your
    >>> competitors will lift them and use them and possibly beat you to market

    >>
    >> Oh, and if your competitors steal your ideas before you get your
    >> product to market then either your company has sprung a leak and
    >> deserves to fail or *shock horror* the idea wasn't that revolutionary
    >> and they came up with it on their own. There's only so many ways to
    >> skin a cat you know.

    >
    > That has to be the dumbest phrase since Owl last opened his mouth.
    >
    > If they have their idea stolen then they they deserve to fail? I dont
    > think I need to add any more. You're plea of insanity is enough to
    > anyone following this thread.
    >
    > You really are a knob jockey if you believe what you wrote above.
    >


    You're insane Quack. Your idea of market nirvana would quickly grind to
    a halt.

  8. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    chrisv wrote:
    > Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >
    >> Quack drooled:
    >>> thousands if not millions to develop certain SW packages. And during
    >>> that phase "ideas" come up which need to be protected or your
    >>> competitors will lift them and use them and possibly beat you to market

    >> Oh, and if your competitors steal your ideas before you get your product
    >> to market then either your company has sprung a leak and deserves to
    >> fail or *shock horror* the idea wasn't that revolutionary and they came
    >> up with it on their own. There's only so many ways to skin a cat you know.

    >
    > The trolling fsckwit thinks that companies should be "protected" from
    > others coming-up-with the same or similar ideas independently. That's
    > not how it works.
    >
    > Why can't the stupid POS understand that copyright laws, together with
    > keeping the code closed and proprietary, are all the fair protection a
    > company needs. If someone else gets and same idea and writes their
    > own code for it, there's nothing wrong with that. Duh.


    Case in point regarding lack of competition=lack of innovation. IE gains
    virtual monopoly then development dies for over 5 years. Firefox arrives
    to challenge and suddenly they can't get versions out the door fast
    enough. Competition is good. It drives the economy and promotes
    investment. The only people that fear competition are those whose
    products or services are substandard.

  9. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    "Phil Da Lick!" writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >> "Phil Da Lick!" writes:
    >>
    >>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>> thousands if not millions to develop certain SW packages. And during
    >>>> that phase "ideas" come up which need to be protected or your
    >>>> competitors will lift them and use them and possibly beat you to market
    >>>
    >>> Oh, and if your competitors steal your ideas before you get your
    >>> product to market then either your company has sprung a leak and
    >>> deserves to fail or *shock horror* the idea wasn't that revolutionary
    >>> and they came up with it on their own. There's only so many ways to
    >>> skin a cat you know.

    >>
    >> That has to be the dumbest phrase since Owl last opened his mouth.
    >>
    >> If they have their idea stolen then they they deserve to fail? I dont
    >> think I need to add any more. You're plea of insanity is enough to
    >> anyone following this thread.
    >>
    >> You really are a knob jockey if you believe what you wrote above.
    >>

    >
    > You're insane Quack. Your idea of market nirvana would quickly grind
    > to a halt.


    Not allowing people to steal (or rather trying to regulate it) is
    "Market Nirvana"?

    You're insane.

    --
    "Its obvious Micoshaft sponsored frauds and net stalkers are now attacking individuals directly in organised gangs in linux advocacy newsgroups as predicted since it is known micoshaft is failing in the market place."
    7, COLA Linux "advocate" and nutjob.

  10. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 12:28:44 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > Roy Schestowitz writes:
    >
    >> Checking in on Nathan Myhrvold
    >>
    >> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>| I'd suggest the business be called Intellectual Vultures' ... because that is
    >>| exactly what Nathan is bringing to the table - nothing. This business model
    >>| stifles and prevents creative idea, and is yet another made up securities
    >>| model that preys on other people's legitimate hard work.
    >>|
    >>| When he was at Microsoft, he had zero practical ideas and I see he's still
    >>| doing the same, only this time, he's screwing the whole public. This business
    >>| is living on the backs of other people because they don't know how to spell
    >>| the word innovation'. How about coming up with an original and useful idea
    >>| and earn it the old fashion way?
    >>|
    >>| Nathan should be ashamed of this practice and he should be investigated by
    >>| the FTC for predatory business practices.
    >> `----
    >>
    >> http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/m...asp?source=rss

    >
    > Where does it say that in the article you liar? More disinformation
    > tactics from you.
    >
    > Heel Linonut, heel! Come to Roy's defence or do you think his quoting
    > stuff from anonymous bloggers as if its part of the original article is
    > ok?
    >
    > Hell, he might as well quote like Phil da Lick or, chuckle,
    > "Owl". Hmm Or did he ? ....


    It doesn't.
    Tim Smith ousted him already.
    I spotted it but got involved in something else and forgot to bring it to
    Roy's *attention*.

    Seeding Google is what it's about.
    Facts don't count.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  11. Re: Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Joe Potter belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > It has nothing to do with "crappy" teams. It's a all a matter of resources.
    > I don't care how much of a lead someone has or thinks they have. If a
    > company like IBM, Microsoft or Google like the idea they can take it and
    > some small company will *never* be able to match the resources, talent and
    > finances the big players are able to throw at the project.
    >
    > So here's how it plays out. You put up your home and entire life savings
    > into an idea. This gets you to the prototype/proof-of-concept stage where
    > you're able to get some VC funding and hire a handful of employees.
    > Eventually your 5-person company comes out with v1.0 of this idea after
    > you've put everything you have in to it.
    >
    > But wait. Google, Microsoft and IBM all really, really like this idea. But
    > I'm sure that your 5-person company with a few month headstart will be able
    > to compete head-to-head against them... right? It's not like these companies
    > have the manpower, R&D resources, labs, industry contacts, name recognition
    > and distribution network to compete with your 5-person company.
    >
    > . . .
    >
    > I'm against SW patents or any patent that's trivial and obvious. But I'm all
    > for the protection of legitimate inventions and innovation.


    http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com...htm#PatentCost

    Looks like maybe a couple thou for one patent.

    Doesn't say how much the lawyers will cost to actually defend the patent
    from the big boys and their teams of lawyers.

    Oh, here's a more detailed breakdown, with additional costs not
    mentioned in the URL above:

    http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/...8october02.htm

    --
    Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even
    where there is no river.
    -- Nikita Khrushchev

  12. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Hadron wrote:
    > "Phil Da Lick!" writes:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>> "Phil Da Lick!" writes:
    >>>
    >>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>> thousands if not millions to develop certain SW packages. And during
    >>>>> that phase "ideas" come up which need to be protected or your
    >>>>> competitors will lift them and use them and possibly beat you to market
    >>>> Oh, and if your competitors steal your ideas before you get your
    >>>> product to market then either your company has sprung a leak and
    >>>> deserves to fail or *shock horror* the idea wasn't that revolutionary
    >>>> and they came up with it on their own. There's only so many ways to
    >>>> skin a cat you know.
    >>> That has to be the dumbest phrase since Owl last opened his mouth.
    >>>
    >>> If they have their idea stolen then they they deserve to fail? I dont
    >>> think I need to add any more. You're plea of insanity is enough to
    >>> anyone following this thread.
    >>>
    >>> You really are a knob jockey if you believe what you wrote above.
    >>>

    >> You're insane Quack. Your idea of market nirvana would quickly grind
    >> to a halt.

    >
    > Not allowing people to steal (or rather trying to regulate it) is
    > "Market Nirvana"?
    >
    > You're insane.


    Regulate a market lol. Good luck with that. They tried that in russia a
    few years ago.

  13. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> And yet you continually advocate a policy that more and more leading
    >> economists and even Bill Gates himself admit are restrictive on the
    >> market. So, the really question is what the **** are *you* on about?

    >
    > There are different levels of intellectual property, copyright, patents
    > etc.
    > I think *most* people agree that certain things should be protected by law
    > and others are ridiculous.
    > Then there is the problem of cost of development, for example drugs.
    > Someone has to foot the bill.


    Arrogant. The reality is that if a product is successful then the bill
    will be "footed". Just because a project is started and costs Xm dollar
    that does not and should not guarantee success. In a market economy you
    should expect more than one product competing for the same market share.
    To prevent that by patenting the crap out of the market space is
    uncompetitive and against free market principles. Now, protecting your
    own product by copyright so nobody can simply lift it, and would have to
    develop their own from scratch, is perfectly reasonable in the pure
    software market.


    > Roy posted something decent a while back concerning someone patenting the
    > concept of reverse engineering DNA to find other *stuff *. IOW just the
    > concept, not the method.
    > I'm a little off on this one, but you should get the idea.
    > To me this is ridiculous.
    > However, should someone come up with a specific method, or machine to
    > reverse engineer DNA then I think that it is valid to patent that
    > idea/machine/method.
    >
    > See what I'm getting at?
    >
    > It's a gross over simplification I know



    That's the problem. Too much simplification and generalisation. The pro
    patent lobby are lumping pure software and a "machine with software"
    into a nice umbrella term "computer implemented invention" which is
    clearly ridiculous.

  14. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 21:29:12 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> And yet you continually advocate a policy that more and more leading
    >>> economists and even Bill Gates himself admit are restrictive on the
    >>> market. So, the really question is what the **** are *you* on about?

    >>
    >> There are different levels of intellectual property, copyright, patents
    >> etc.
    >> I think *most* people agree that certain things should be protected by law
    >> and others are ridiculous.
    >> Then there is the problem of cost of development, for example drugs.
    >> Someone has to foot the bill.

    >
    > Arrogant. The reality is that if a product is successful then the bill
    > will be "footed". Just because a project is started and costs Xm dollar
    > that does not and should not guarantee success. In a market economy you
    > should expect more than one product competing for the same market share.
    > To prevent that by patenting the crap out of the market space is
    > uncompetitive and against free market principles. Now, protecting your
    > own product by copyright so nobody can simply lift it, and would have to
    > develop their own from scratch, is perfectly reasonable in the pure
    > software market.


    So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    being able to manufacture and sell the same product?

    And they will most certainly be able to undercut the price because they
    don't have to pay for the research to develop the product.

    See the flaw in your argument?

    >
    >> Roy posted something decent a while back concerning someone patenting the
    >> concept of reverse engineering DNA to find other *stuff *. IOW just the
    >> concept, not the method.
    >> I'm a little off on this one, but you should get the idea.
    >> To me this is ridiculous.
    >> However, should someone come up with a specific method, or machine to
    >> reverse engineer DNA then I think that it is valid to patent that
    >> idea/machine/method.
    >>
    >> See what I'm getting at?
    >>
    >> It's a gross over simplification I know

    >
    >
    > That's the problem. Too much simplification and generalisation. The pro
    > patent lobby are lumping pure software and a "machine with software"
    > into a nice umbrella term "computer implemented invention" which is
    > clearly ridiculous.


    I'm not following you?
    Give an example.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  15. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    > So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    > being able to manufacture and sell the same product?


    Taking a product with a a complete roadmap to market certainly does not
    cost zero and you know better than that.


    > And they will most certainly be able to undercut the price because they
    > don't have to pay for the research to develop the product.
    >
    > See the flaw in your argument?


    Not really. You're being idealistic. I wish the world did work that way
    all the time but in some cases it does, and some it doesn't. The pure
    software market does not work well with patenting. It does work well
    with copyrighting, trademarking and trade secrets approaches.


  16. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:21:01 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    >> being able to manufacture and sell the same product?

    >
    > Taking a product with a a complete roadmap to market certainly does not
    > cost zero and you know better than that.


    But it still cost a hell of a lot less than the R&D the original company
    had to lay out.
    Also you negate the fact that the original company has to design a roadmap,
    marketing plan, packageing etc as well.

    So I ask again, why should one company design the product and others can
    sell it as well without having foot the bill for the R&D?



    >
    >> And they will most certainly be able to undercut the price because they
    >> don't have to pay for the research to develop the product.
    >>
    >> See the flaw in your argument?

    >
    > Not really. You're being idealistic. I wish the world did work that way
    > all the time but in some cases it does, and some it doesn't. The pure
    > software market does not work well with patenting. It does work well
    > with copyrighting, trademarking and trade secrets approaches.


    No I'm not.

    In fact it happens all the time.

    See Chinese knock offs for examples.
    It's almost impossible to stop those.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  17. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    "Phil Da Lick!" writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >> "Phil Da Lick!" writes:
    >>
    >>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>> "Phil Da Lick!" writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>> thousands if not millions to develop certain SW packages. And during
    >>>>>> that phase "ideas" come up which need to be protected or your
    >>>>>> competitors will lift them and use them and possibly beat you to market
    >>>>> Oh, and if your competitors steal your ideas before you get your
    >>>>> product to market then either your company has sprung a leak and
    >>>>> deserves to fail or *shock horror* the idea wasn't that revolutionary
    >>>>> and they came up with it on their own. There's only so many ways to
    >>>>> skin a cat you know.
    >>>> That has to be the dumbest phrase since Owl last opened his mouth.
    >>>>
    >>>> If they have their idea stolen then they they deserve to fail? I dont
    >>>> think I need to add any more. You're plea of insanity is enough to
    >>>> anyone following this thread.
    >>>>
    >>>> You really are a knob jockey if you believe what you wrote above.
    >>>>
    >>> You're insane Quack. Your idea of market nirvana would quickly grind
    >>> to a halt.

    >>
    >> Not allowing people to steal (or rather trying to regulate it) is
    >> "Market Nirvana"?
    >>
    >> You're insane.

    >
    > Regulate a market lol. Good luck with that. They tried that in russia
    > a few years ago.


    As I said - you are insane.

  18. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: Intellectual Monopolies

    "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:

    > On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:21:01 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    >>> being able to manufacture and sell the same product?

    >>
    >> Taking a product with a a complete roadmap to market certainly does not
    >> cost zero and you know better than that.

    >
    > But it still cost a hell of a lot less than the R&D the original company
    > had to lay out.
    > Also you negate the fact that the original company has to design a roadmap,
    > marketing plan, packageing etc as well.
    >
    > So I ask again, why should one company design the product and others can
    > sell it as well without having foot the bill for the R&D?


    I think he is insane. Seriously.

  19. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    > On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:21:01 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> So why should a compnay that did not spend a dime on research profit by
    >>> being able to manufacture and sell the same product?

    >> Taking a product with a a complete roadmap to market certainly does not
    >> cost zero and you know better than that.

    >
    > But it still cost a hell of a lot less than the R&D the original company
    > had to lay out.
    > Also you negate the fact that the original company has to design a roadmap,
    > marketing plan, packageing etc as well.
    >
    > So I ask again, why should one company design the product and others can
    > sell it as well without having foot the bill for the R&D?



    That's the way the world works. As I've said before, it's not perfect
    but its betetr than communism. You meantion cheap chinese knockoffs in
    another post in this thread yet I don't notice a clamour by govts of the
    west to protect their markets against these things. I wonder why that is.

  20. Re: [News] Many New Products from Debt-approaching Microsoft: IntellectualMonopolies

    Hadron wrote:
    > As I said - you are insane.


    You've said it many times. That doesn't make it true. Just like the rest
    of your droppings.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast