Microsoft may not sell MS Word

[icyrus]

Get yourself a job.
Tell your boss you do not wish to be paid.

You'll get the point at some stage.

You are obviously incapable of thought.

While I agree that this particular patent seems to be quite generic, and prior art lurks around every corner, to say that all patents should be abolished is an extreme stance.

Not allowing someone to protect their intellectual property (in fact arguing that intellectual property doesn't exist, which seems to be your argument) would most definitely stifle innovation. If you can't see that then it isn't even worth trying to explain it to you.

Patents were invented for the betterment of society as a whole not the inventor, just like copyright. Whether they are still useful (in general) is debatable. What is certain is that software patents specifically are entirely useless.

This has been discussed before though.

 

[Ou grote]

You are obviously incapable of thought.



Patents were invented for the betterment of society as a whole not the inventor, just like copyright. Whether they are still useful (in general) is debatable. What is certain is that software patents specifically are entirely useless.

This has been discussed before though.

Don't worry, just study hard in school and one day you may do something useful.

 

[porchrat]

Patents were invented for the betterment of society as a whole not the inventor, just like copyright. Whether they are still useful (in general) is debatable.

Unless I misunderstand the concept of a patent, your view is slightly flawed. Patents exist in order to encourage inventors to release the secrets of their inventions in exchange for a period of exclusive use or implementation of that technology or invention. This does indeed benefit society in the long term, but in the short term it benefits the holder of the patent.

This system benefits the inventor immediately and society after the period of exclusivity ends. The upshot of all of this is that the inventor then has some time to earn back the costs of developing the patented technology/process etc. and that society has unhindered access to that technology after the period of exclusivity ends.

If patents did not exist then instead of releasing new inventions to the world the secrets of these new inventions would never be revealed (unless someone reverse engineered it, but the ethics of that practice is a discussion for another day). How exactly would the latter situation benefit society?

 

[Ou grote]

Unless I misunderstand the concept of a patent, your view is slightly flawed. Patents exist in order to encourage inventors to release the secrets of their inventions in exchange for a period of exclusive use or implementation of that technology or invention. This does indeed benefit society in the long term, but in the short term it benefits the holder of the patent.

This system benefits the inventor immediately and society after the period of exclusivity ends. The upshot of all of this is that the inventor then has some time to earn back the costs of developing the patented technology/process etc. and that society has unhindered access to that technology after the period of exclusivity ends.

If patents did not exist then instead of releasing new inventions to the world the secrets of these new inventions would never be revealed (unless someone reverse engineered it, but the ethics of that practice is a discussion for another day). How exactly would the latter situation benefit society?

I suspect he's a commie wannabee.
He ain't going understand.

 

[icyrus]

If patents did not exist then instead of releasing new inventions to the world the secrets of these new inventions would never be revealed (unless someone reverse engineered it, but the ethics of that practice is a discussion for another day). How exactly would the latter situation benefit society?

The initial idea has been perverted. Massive corporates spend large sums of money building patent armories which they use as a weapon against competitors. I don't think there is a need to explain why this is not beneficial to society.

Have you looked through the thread I posted? It was quite lengthy with arguments made for and against patents. Is there really a need to restart that discussion here?

 

[apogeeza]

Patents should be abolished, especially for software but I can't help but crack a smile about this after Microsoft's long and continued support of software patents.

and especially when they have been threatening Linux an Open Source in these mysterious infringements on MS copyrights. Nice to be bitchslapped with the same leather glove, isn't it MS?

 

[Tassidar]

Well the bombing of Hiroshima stopped WW2, talk about two wrongs and a right at the end of it = end of WW2.

We're getting way of topic here, but one could argue that the end of WWII was inevitable (actually I have read that Japan was trying to surrender) and that the nuke was more of a statement towards Russia and the start of the cold war than the ending of WWII.

 

[PeterCH]

We're getting way of topic here, but one could argue that the end of WWII was inevitable (actually I have read that Japan was trying to surrender) and that the nuke was more of a statement towards Russia and the start of the cold war than the ending of WWII.

Yes that can be argued this way too - however that is not the only example, say the bombing of Dresden or any 'killing of enemy soldiers' to defend your country or self or stop the war - there are many examples of numerous wrongs adding up to a right.

 

[PeterCH]

"Andnothingofvaluewaslost" fits this post perfectly.

 

[apogeeza]

http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/


http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/en/m/intro/explain.html

Additional Explanation

This page provides a quick explanation of the logic behind the consequences of software patents that are mentioned on the start page of this website.

"You'll know when you get the bill."
Software patents would give large corporations a strategic advantage over small and medium-sized ones, and a potentially destructive weapon against open source. Those effects are explained in greater detail on other pages of this website. Less competition in the marketplace results in higher prices, which is why you would literally "get the bill" for software patents by having to pay more for software as well as for products that contain software, such as mobile telephones. Of course, that sentence was also meant figuratively, in the sense that there are various other negative effects of software patents that all of us would experience.

"When someone breaks into your computer, reads your E-mails, and steals the password of your bank account."
On this page you can read more about the implications of software patents to security. Researchers of the Technical University at Berlin found out that software patents promote the development and mass distribution of insecure software.

"When your computer crashes every day."
The stability of software is adversely affected by software patents due to the same reasons for which software patents result in insecure software.

"When spam doesn't stop."
There are already various patents on anti-spam techniques. On this page you can read about how large corporations try to establish industry standards related to which they own patents. There is no assurance that open-source software will ever be allowed to implement any of those patented ideas. Since open-source software powers large parts of the Internet, patents are a potential hinderance to the wide adoption of certain anti-spam techniques.

"When prices go up and companies shut down."
The implications to software prices were explained further above. The risk of companies shutting down is due to the fact that a few large corporations will drive smaller competitors out of the market with the help of the patent system. The reasons for that are explained on other pages of this website, such as this one.

"When people lose their jobs."
That is an inevitable consequence if small and medium-sized enterprises are weakened or, in some cases, even driven out of business.

This was just a quick explanation of the reasoning behind some of the statements on the front page of this website. Please take your time to read the more detailed and more specific explanations that this website offers on other pages. It's important to know what software patents would mean to Europe.

 

[apogeeza]

and anyone who claims that MS's products are cheap and affordable of surely bull-shirting themselves.