Microsoft Patents Multithreaded Opening and Saving

[davewolfgang]

Sad - the ONLY thing that should be allowed for this is to copyright the actual programming CODE that does this. And ONLY in that programming language.

Quit allowing companies to patent the END RESULT of a process. (And shapes and finger movements...)

 

[techslave3]

I'm going to patent the equals sign.

 

[torque79]

I'm going to patent multi-threaded versions of the following functions:
printing
emailing
displaying
keyboard input
mouse clicking
website loading
loading operating systems from a SSD

 

[wiyosaya]

This is another patent I bet someone will challenge and it will be nullified.

 

[Pherule]

Ah, so does this mean that when you're in Microsoft word and you have the Options settings box open, and you try to close Word, it won't flash the Options box at you and will immediately close Word? Because I hate software that flashes stuff at you when you try to close it. If I close it I mean close now, die die die. The Linux way: Kill it with fire.

Also, patenting this is dumb.

 

[bit_user]

I think it's safe to assume that any patent mentioning threads is already in common use. I didn't study this one in detail, but it sounds just like what would be covered in any textbook on multithreaded programming.

Is this a result of switching from first-to-invent to first-to-file? If so, the days ahead look dark, indeed.

 

[bit_user]

[citation][nom]guardianangel42[/nom]Quite a lot of patents are granted which are used today by direct competitors without a single cent being payed in royalty.[/citation]
New patent law says that if a patent is granted (to someone else) that covers something you're already doing, you are unaffected by it, for the products in which you're using it. But that still means any new products that use these types of obvious patents can be sued by patent trolls or by companies engaging in anti-competitive practices.

And patent law doesn't force me to pay someone for infringing their patent. It just gives them the right to sue me. It's a civil, not criminal thing. Therefore, you get to make the call as to whether you want to risk being sued or try to pay up front.

Now, to illustrate the absurdity of the situation, if a software company actually tried to negotiate licensing deals with every patent they're infringing, not only would it take them decades to do it, but the product would probably cost millions or billions of dollars.

That's why patent trolls are such a problem. Because there are so many bad patents out there, that these guys can always find SOMETHING you might be infringing (and they don't even have to tell you which one(s), before taking you to court).

 

[Guest]

This patent is just describing textbook multi-threading, which I use in nearly every program I write--especially when loading or saving data due to I/O or Internet bottlenecks. In fact, many APIs are now multi-threaded natively for tasks that might cause an application to appear idle.

 

[sna]

I dont know , but isnt download accelerator use the same method in concept?

dividing the files into smaller parts and downloading them together?

I hate the patent system ...

 

[davewolfgang]

New patent law says that if a patent is granted (to someone else) that covers something you're already doing, you are unaffected by it, for the products in which you're using it...

That's the problem - NO patent should be granted - I know, get this CRAAAAZY notion (that's the way it's SUPPOSED TO BE) - if something is ALREADY BEING DONE AND USED!!!!! Especially if it's by others.