  TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
1 edit | Oh why not..... Sure let see if we can use the courts to get a little wergild out of Google they are rich they can afford it. When is this crap going to stop.
--
Eat pork chops for Allah! | |
|
 |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Oh why not..... said by Transmaster:Sure let see if we can use the courts to get a little wergild out of Google they are rich they can afford it. When is this crap going to stop. When startup companies do patent searches and cut deals BEFORE they roll out their systems??
But most startups ignore patents on the theory that if they go broke, they won't have paid anything to the patent holders. And if the company becomes a big hit and makes billions they will just buy off the patent holders if they sue.
My bet is that Google will settle for millions to make this go away.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page
| |
|
| | TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY | Re: Oh why not..... Of course this is part in parcel the wreckage left over by the Dot-bomb era. There where all of these patients issued for stuff that should not have been patented. Then you have tiny companies formed for nothing more then to collect, then wait out to see which of the patients they own pans out and then they move in to extract some cash from who ever they can get the courts to believe infringed on them. If our dear Congress and Senate was not so busy back stabbing, investigating, hating the President, sucking up to Moveon.org, trying to undercut our Military, just maybe they might see fit to address this area. But NOOOOO that might mean they where doing their jobs.
--
Eat pork chops for Allah! | |
|
| | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Oh why not..... I won't dispute that the patent system is screwed up and has been for 100 years. Thomas Edison, Alexander Graham Bell, etc all had years long patent battles - so this isn't exactly new.
And a better system is needed. But no matter what changes they come up with, there will be legal battles because whenever millions and billions of dollars are involved there will be lawsuits.
And doing away with patents isn't a solution either because that would remove the incentive for the individual or small firm to actually invent something if they know it can be stolen with impunity. Part of the backbone of democracy is property rights and patents are just part of that.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page
| |
|
| | | | TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
1 edit | Re: Oh why not..... Oh no the patent system and those rights are vital to technological innovation. This is a area that really needs reform but right now there are to many lawyer making to much money for things to change. The area I don't like is the belated enforcement of these patients, like the Mp3 patient. But suppose if I was in a position to skim some cash from the likes of Google I would do the same thing. What I find interesting in this case is the Law Firm that first alerted Northwest and this associate prof didn't take on the case themselves.
--
Eat pork chops for Allah! | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| said by Romney2012:And doing away with patents isn't a solution either because that would remove the incentive for the individual or small firm to actually invent something if they know it can be stolen with impunity. Part of the backbone of democracy is property rights and patents are just part of that. Where should the line be drawn? I can agree with drug companies patenting a breakthrough compound. In that case property rights (and patent modification of them) are important to encourage new discoveries. But, should the first person to discover how to read/write a file patent it? Or, using a mouse as an input device?
This seems like obscenity. We all know it when we see it, but nobody can describe what constitutes it.
Copyrights are clearer because you can't copyright an idea. Only the original, creative expression of an idea. Patents are just ideas. It's never clear when an idea is unique enough to justify protection.
Mark | |
|
| |  sporkmedrop the crantini and move it, sisterPremium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
 ·Optimum Online
| said by Romney2012:said by Transmaster:Sure let see if we can use the courts to get a little wergild out of Google they are rich they can afford it. When is this crap going to stop. When startup companies do patent searches and cut deals BEFORE they roll out their systems?? The problem is that people patent some really broad and simple ideas. How many patents are there out there where if you put 20 smart programmers in a room and said "solve this problem" they'd end up infringing someone's patent without having any knowledge of doing so?
A good and simple example would be Amazon's one-click ordering/checkout system. It's obvious, it's easy to implement, and it's a "problem" that everyone wants to solve and can solve with a few hours of thinking. | |
|
| | |  nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | Re: Oh why not..... said by sporkme:The problem is that people patent some really broad and simple ideas. How many patents are there out there where if you put 20 smart programmers in a room and said "solve this problem" they'd end up infringing someone's patent without having any knowledge of doing so? A good and simple example would be Amazon's one-click ordering/checkout system. It's obvious, it's easy to implement, and it's a "problem" that everyone wants to solve and can solve with a few hours of thinking. Bingo.
--
Everyday, thousands of new cars are delivered to their new owners with poorly-selected radio station presets. | |
|
| |
| KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | well first thing that needs to be done is ban these Patent Holding Corperations. i have no issue with say GE holding a patent for a jet engine design. but you get some of these firms that have zero intention to build anything and just hold patents for the day they can sue someone.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
 r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX | They must have a very weak case. If they had problems finding a lawyer to work pro bono, then it must be a very weak case.
--
»www.ryanoneill.us | |
|
| Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4
1 edit | Re: They must have a very weak case. said by r81984:If they had problems finding a lawyer to work pro bono, then it must be a very weak case. Not necessarily. It just means most law firms didn't want to take on Google's deep pocket lawyers. It takes a big law firm to take on Google without needing money up front. | |
|
| TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY | Yes and the law firm they hired went shopping for a court which has a track record of big settlement down in marshall, Texas. Here is the waste of band width website of the prof that is a party to the law suit. »www.jarg.com/
--
Eat pork chops for Allah! | |
|
| contsolePremium
join:2003-12-30
Bloomfield, CT | said by r81984:pro bono, then it must be a very weak case.
I think you mean "on Contingency." They are not taking it for free. | |
|
 Toguro
join:2003-10-23
Ottawa, IL | And Google will respond by And Google will respond by buying Northeastern University to create GUniversity Google's very own accredited online university | |
|
| TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
1 edit | Re: And Google will respond by At the very least they will build and endow a new building on the Northwestern campus "The Google College of Yo"  To study the nebulous area between Yes and No. 
--
Eat pork chops for Allah! | |
|
| | | | Re: And Google will respond by I thought it was Northeastern not Northwestern. I also wonder if its the Northeastern here in Chicago or the one on the East coast. It can't be the one here, its crappy and i don't even think they have computers. | |
|
| | | TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY | Re: And Google will respond by said by matrixdsl:I thought it was Northeastern not Northwestern. I also wonder if its the Northeastern here in Chicago or the one on the East coast. It can't be the one here, its crappy and i don't even think they have computers. You are correct, I was having a Microsoft moment
--
Eat pork chops for Allah! | |
|
| | | said by Toguro:And Google will respond by buying Northeastern University to create GUniversity Google's very own accredited online university Yep,
Probably will!!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ | |
|
| KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | im sure google will fund some research of the professor and he will be quiet.
hey how about we buy your CS department a few of those new top end RISC based IBM machines....
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| | Baseless. I'm really sure college kids looked up a patent to get ideas on how to make a search engine. Patents are bullshit, because they prevent people from independently developing anything. Northwestern should have to prove that the guys looked up and used information from their patent, before they should be allowed to say google stole anything. | |
|
| | | Re: Baseless. No, patents are actually quite useful if they are used for protecting an idea for a process you have developed that is both totally unique and original. The patent system has been seriously abused, however, and "obvious" patents have quickly become the norm over the past ten to twenty years -- especially from Microsoft. | |
|
| | | | Re: Baseless. This kind of crap has to stop.. That is like car maker companys going after each other. Cause the car is using gas to run on. lmao | |
|
| | If you are to slow to understand the value of patents please stay out of the debate.
Would it be shocking that a big company stepped all over a little guy start up, or that a company took ideas from college kids? | |
|
| | BS I think a patent should only be good if it has been put to use. In other words if you don't put your invention to some use or make some effort after getting a patent what the hell good is getting a patent if you don't want to make money from it? Just wait and hope someone will think of somthing similar and then sic the lawyers on them. A patent should be given a period of, say 5 years. If you don't use it then you sat on your ass too long and you loose it | |
|
|  gaforcesUnited We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA | Re: BS So the oil companys would have to pony up those gas saving patents aye? And all those other companys holding patents to stay competitive.
Sounds good to me ... | |
|
| | | If you read the article, you'd realize that JARG (the company) is in the business of semantic search for the science/medical field. Furthermore, they don't own the patent, they own an exclusive license to it. The patent may be overly broad, but the company obviously has a vested interest in taking a competitor in the search game out of the market if that competitor is using the same tech. Normally that's related to costs and eliminating inequities in overhead, but here it's just eliminating a competitor, hence the exclusive nature of the patent.
The university has got to sue as well to establish it's patent as valid because (1) it's being shorted on cash and/or (2) the exclusive licensee could reneg and say the patent is obviously invalid and not pay any more for the license it enjoys if the owner didn't pursue other violators of it.
This is one of the rare patent cases where, with a recent ruling from the Supreme Court of the United States, the plaintiff could reasonably be granted an injunction. SCOTUS recently held that an injunction did not automatically follow in a patent dispute if the plaintiff didn't have a competing product/technology/service/whatever. It clearly does in this case.
I have my doubts as to the validity of the patent given the time line, but on it's face it appears to have merit until the patent can be proven void due to prior art, etc. It seems quite obvious to me that distributed computing would eventually apply to databases, search engines, etc. I guess we'll see if a court in Texas thinks so. | |
|
| | There's a lot of pro-google comments here this is what i find fascinating about google.
they are a conglomerate company, yet they have something that other companies crave and can't buy.
and that is the trust of the public.
say what you want about google, but people like google. and consumer trust is worth its weight in gold.
just look at people defending google.
if it was Microsoft or Sony, all the comments here would not be as positive. | |
|
|  MadcapPiercing GuruPremium
join:2004-06-26
Kenosha, WI | Re: There's a lot of pro-google comments here True enough. As Ask.com learned, Google has very very loyal fans. | |
|
| | Fundamental database technology? It's a good bet that both IBM and Oracle have earlier patents on the exact same thing. | |
|
1 edit | Google Overrated While I agree that the lawsuit is B.S. and bares no merit, I must say that google is so overrated. I love they way they prance around and act like they invented the search engine concept when it fact it was around way before they came about.
Then for whatever reason, the media embraced it and managed to brainwash everyone into using it by whoring it around 24/7. Movies, TV sitcoms, etc. Then you have these stupid hipsters and such using it as a verb, "I googled my friend" I'm like, oh puhleeze! 
Yahoo still works and quite well too. I really think people just like to use google because they think it's "cool" and "hip" in popular culture. Not because they actually think it works any better. IMO, Yahoo's search engine is superior. I've done searches on the same item several times in both google and yahoo. Yahoo brought up more accurate results while google gave me a lot of irrelevant nonsense. Only thing I can say google is a little faster
Just my $0.02 | |
|
| | | Re: Google Overrated google got popular because it works, certainly not because its hip or cool.
i don't think 'hip" and "cool" are what you think off with search engines.
go to the google webpage. what do you see? just a search bar and some links on the top.
go to yahoo webpage, and watch your pupils dilate from all the garbage on the frontpage. | |
|
| | DodgePremium
join:2002-11-27 | Re: Google Overrated It USED TO work. Google's search results still work for most "non-commercialized" searches. However, if you enter a keyword that somehow, even remotely, corresponds to someone's money making scheme, you will get useless spam results. | |
|
| | |  FiLPremium
join:2005-08-16
Silver Spring, MD | Re: Google Overrated What?
Maybe you need to learn how to do a search. But if your getting those results, a quick edit of the search term plus/minus a few words ends up getting you what you were looking for. | |
|
| | | | DodgePremium
join:2002-11-27 | Re: Google Overrated Like I said depends on what you are looking for. Most of the time it works semi-ok, however try looking for something obscure, and by adding words you will go from 1,854,543,234,432 results found with first 3 pages of garbage to "no reults found" very quickly. | |
|
| | Google Database Oh for crying out loud! What is it with companies? Everybody is acusing everybody of using the same code. Gosh there's only so many ways a program can be written or a circut designed. Did Ford sue any of the other car makers back in the 20's when they developed a car that had a steering wheel or an engine? Did any of the AM radio companies sue each other back in the teens and 20's when Philips, Magnavox and RCA ALL made am radios?
Give me a break! | |
|
| | | Re: Google Database said by ATTGUY :
Did Ford sue any of the other car makers back in the 20's when they developed a car that had a steering wheel or an engine? Did any of the AM radio companies sue each other back in the teens and 20's when Philips, Magnavox and RCA ALL made am radios?
Not sure of the specifics, but in general, yes. | |
|
| | hmm everybody is saying they are suing for money and its not valid but the patent existed before google was incorporated. It joust so happens that north eastern gets this patern and all of a sudden the next year google becomes incorporated? It does seem like they have a case.
If you read the article it took 2 years just to find a lawyer who didnt want money outright. | |
|
|
|
·
