And here's perfect proof that the system is completely broken.... "Automation" was conceived more than 100 years ago. Software "automation" is used in every industry and started it's usage prior to Symantec ever filing for the patent (think back to the 60's people as "software automation" is one of the things that allows the internet to function). This is a good case for "prior art" as even Windows used "software automation" to a small extent prior to 1992....maybe that's why MS isn't included in this suit? If by some act of pure stupidity these idiots win, expect higher prices on EVERYTHING.
Perhaps, with patents like these should have a sell-by date. I mean, if implemented in the 90's then it would be ahead of it's time (to a degree). But at the stage we are, it is obvious and could easily be implemented without thought by a weekend programmer.
[citation][nom]billybobser[/nom]Perhaps, with patents like these should have a sell-by date. I mean, if implemented in the 90's then it would be ahead of it's time (to a degree). But at the stage we are, it is obvious and could easily be implemented without thought by a weekend programmer.[/citation]
Patents do have a sell by date. That's the whole point of patents. Otherwise they would create indefinite monopolies.
I think patent duration is 20 years from the day of the first filing in most countries these days. Way too long for some of the bullshit that can be patented these days.
[citation][nom]rantoc[/nom]Hardly surprising with todays so called patent system! It needs a restart to actually encourage advances not use them for bullying the competition or like this.[/citation]
Patents that were issued need a short expire date and the new system needs international agreement. It does need to be restarted and on an even playing field so that products made in one country aren't able to avoid the costs of licenses in another.
It seems what many of the lawyers seem to do in this country is create more work and profit for themselves without every contributing to the quality of life to the rest of the country. Just look at all the lawyers at capital hill and what they are doing.
Everything that has or is dependent on a chip (whether it is hardware or software) shoudn't be patented!
It would be the best thing that could happen for innovation!
Only the patent lawyers would be the real losers.
sooo why don't they just sue everyone on earth for living while they're at it? they summed up pretty much every device/software all tech companies offer. Dammnn, Data Carriers must be the grandfather of all technology to be suing over that much. *Laugh*
Who at the patent office is approving such general "encompasses the whole universe" patents? I'd like to think that the patent office is full of Einsteins waiting to be discovered but this makes it seem more likely that its mostly engineering and scientist rejects who couldn't make it in industry or academia.
@cchambers: IBM already did. That way, they can shut down any patent troll that tries to go after them.
Anyone else ever use the "Record Macro" feature in MS Excel back in like 1990? I suspect that's why MSFT wasn't named. It isn't just an interpretation of the patent to a set of features. It is the very description given in this article.
[citation][nom]molo9000[/nom]Patents do have a sell by date. That's the whole point of patents. Otherwise they would create indefinite monopolies.I think patent duration is 20 years from the day of the first filing in most countries these days. Way too long for some of the bullshit that can be patented these days.[/citation]
Not to mention they can make very small changes and reapply them to extend the length of them.