|reply to elwoodblues |
Re: its funny and sad at the same time.
said by elwoodblues:Sometimes a process is innovative and should be patentable. What's the difference in terms of innovation between an innovative process and an innovative product? I can possibly see why there may be a public policy reason against software patents, but other process patents are valuable. said by Gami00:
i'm glad they're doing it to apple.
but it is sad that it has now come to this in this silly patent wars.
the US patent system needs to be flushed and cleaned so that this doesn't happen anymore.
I couldn't agree more. Every patent becomes invalid, no more patents on swipes, clicks, shapes, colours and the lot.
You should be able to patent real items not processes.
I've heard, and I don't know if it's true, that Harry Reid takes it up the kiester from farm animals.
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
Agreed, but obviousness, natural extensions of existing technology and prior art should render many, MANY of these applications as rejected.
Alas, it has not, and this is the result.
Using patents to fight competition and innovation is not what they are about.
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini