Company sues Microsoft over Windows 8 interface

[BeVonk!]

Biscuit1018 ... I hear what you say, and I agree 100% that the patent system is seriously flawed (and in need of an overhaul) ... but just like Apple is now pursuing Samsung using the flawed system so others will do as well, as is the case here. Considering the basis of Apple's victory over Samsung in the US this case against MS is even stronger.

 

[Tick]

I actually believe this company has a good case.

I think you're confusing having a 'legally sound' case with having a 'morally sound' case. Patents are immoral and what this patent troll (yes, it's a patent troll by definition as they have no real products) is doing is vile, and amounts to robbery at gunpoint when you get down to the nuts and bolts of how the system is structured (they effectively can use the legal system to initiate force against innocent parties to seize their private property - that is effectively what a patent is).

People say the 'rules of the game' should change - that is wrong, because this isn't a game, this is real life, and real people are being harmed in real ways by the patent system, and real crooks benefiting from it, stealing a lot of money from innocent people. This isn't a "game" at all, and these aren't "rules", it's just theft. I think it takes a special kind of person to use the adjective "good" to describe what they're doing, even if you mean it in the sense that a sociopathic lawyer might (yes they have a "good" case in the same way Hitler was "good" at killing people) ... fortunately most commenters here seem to have more morally sound instincts on the matter.

 

[lachesis]

My 2c. I think patents are good. the way i see it is that it actually aids innovation, but not necessarily for the big players. without patents, few people would see any value in developing new ideas as the new ideas would just be taken by the big players, pushing the innovators out of business. eventually innovators will move their attention to new avenues that allow them some form of protection for their efforts in new and more profitable markets. that leaves only big players in the market and they will hamper innovation themselves, as that would be the best business (and most profitable) case.

this is the case here, these guys were way advanced, 8 or more years ago, they realised the way forward. it had to be a sound case for a patent to be awarded in the first place. so I think they have every right to sue. They obviously invested time and intellect into the design and should be rewarded for such.

i think just because its not tangible, we shouldn't see it as not valuable. and valuable items should be afforded some form of protection, ie. patents

If MS knew about the design they should have collaborated with the inventors. If they honestly did not now about such a design, and came up with it on their own (8 years too late), they need to pay their dues, as the design is already owned.

This is all assuming the company has the legal rights to the design ofcourse.