@liw It's broken in lots of very bad ways. But I think they nearly all go back to the flawed (and in my opinion likely corrupt) decision to allow business process patents which opened the way for software patents.

@liw @ersatzmaus I like the idea of patents in principle. Tell us how you did it, and in exchange we promise to not compete with you for a short while.

Michael Jackson's Smooth Criminal leaning trick, that's the system working as intended. A magician revealing his tricks, which we could all now reproduce if we wanted to. If it actually worked like this, I would be more in favour of keeping the patent system.

@JordiGH @liw Sure. And for non software/business-method it can actually work like that. But the goalposts have been shifted. Patents are now written in language that is simultaneously over-broad and uninformative (does not include the information required to reproduce). Add to that they are granted for completely obvious non-innovations and the people who work in the target field are held to be both incompetent to tell if they are infringing _and_ guilty of wilful infringement at the same time…

@ersatzmaus @JordiGH Further, the system is gamed by big corporations, to the detriment of everyone else. Pharma patents get tweaked and then get a new patent, basically extending patent protection indefinitely.

This isn't undocumented.

@ersatzmaus @JordiGH If the patent system worked as it's supposed, I wouldn't oppose all patents, but it doesn't, so I do.

@liw @JordiGH Indeed. The system is rife with abuses and the powers that be show no desire whatsoever to fix things (or even admit that there's a problem).

@ersatzmaus @liw Maybe it would help if independent discovery were a valid defense, like it is with copyright? Independent discovery demonstrates that society did not need the patent because it was easy enough for someone else to come up with it.

@JordiGH @liw Not useful because you as a non-patent-lawyer are not held to be competent to know if you are infringing. But you _are_ held to be responsible for wilful infringement (and punitive damages) if you knew the patent existed (even though legally you're held to be incompetent to evaluate said patent).

@JordiGH @liw The problem is fundamentally that garbage patents are issued and it is expensive to defend against a patent shakedown. And there's really no upside to taking on that cost in the short and medium terms.

@ersatzmaus that is truly a garbage patent. They seem to be claiming to own the entire concept of sending a photo over a wireless network

@fraggle I hadn't even looked at the details - I assumed they were going after gnome/shotwell in the belief that they didn't have deep pockets and would just roll over, allowing them to threaten more people with the same.

@ersatzmaus @fraggle Which is an interesting belief given how many IBM employees are paid to contribute to GNOME. The black gate of Armonk may be about to open and unleash a horde of Nazgûl.

@brad @fraggle Maybe, maybe not. SCO attacked IBM directly so there's clearly no shortage of suicidal idiocy out there. Not sure if big blue will get involved here though.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!