Hacker News Reader

Comment by eagleal | Hacker News Reader

Well, Salesforce should have done their homework, the first thing you have to do (when you start to get pretty big) is check if you infringe any patents.

View on HN

I don't believe there exists a technology company in the world that doesn't infringe on patents (mostly unintentionally). I think if most of them really looked they'd find thousands patents they are infringing.

I know. My current project goes near 4 claims on 5 patents, till now (I don't make infringement, but still have found myself near some mines). However my point is that you can't blame MS for this, but the patent law. Either change it, use it, or remove it. You have 3 options.

Most users here are saying that "ethically" MS is doing wrong. This is not an ethical issue, it's a legal one (MS isn't the only one, recently Apple, Nokia, etc). The problem of patents it's been around for decades, or at least years, why haven't anyone fixed it. America is a democracy, right? Now go and change the law, if you can.

Or, wait for a replacement of the current patent system, I think it's only a matter of years, now.

EDIT: Of the 5 patents I was talking about, none of them use the invention on an actual product.

EDIT2: clarified 2nd par.

Now you're starting to make some sense. I guess you can't trust a large company to behave ethically, only to stay within the law.

The problem is, the system is set up in such a way that it's impossible for a small company to stay legal. Even if you grew into a medium sized company, and you managed to spend the time required to research all the patents you're infringing on, the licensing costs for all those patents would be greater than all the money your company will make over its entire lifetime. Because you now know about all the patents, even the silly ones, and you can't actually afford to challenge all of them, so you just have to license them.

That is what would happen if a small / medium company did its best to stay legal when it comes to patents. It's absurd.

The last thing you should do is look at patents. If you knowingly infringe a patent, your "willful" infringement opens you up to triple damages. It's actually better to not know.

The problem is you can't recognize when someone is infringing a patent knowingly or not, based on what they're saying (unless they've got a request for licensing).

But here we're going in a total different direction. You're telling me that you shouldn't look at patents. Weren't the patents invented for being publicly accessible, so you can see if you infringe, and license them?

You can't see it, can you? You look at the patents, copy every feature of them, than incorporate your company somewhere where there aren't international copyright/patent agreements. Sure you can't have the same resources as everyone else, but you're free to create them too.

And then? What do you propose is the next logical step once you have the list of patents you infringe on? Go to Microsoft and say "please sue us now"? Because if you were going to suggest that they re-develop in order to avoid infringing any patents, you're either from another planet or a troll.

Then nothing. You should expect this. If the court sets a fine, you should pay it.

EDIT: I'm not trolling, nor I would ever want to do so. It's just that people here are forgetting how the system works (you're a hacker, find your way out). See last paragraph http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1363080

I expected the downmod. That's why I said I shouldn't tell this[1]. People here appear to be so worried about ethics, that forgot everything else. Will you please explain to me, the invalidity of the case? I mean they made patent infringement, and if the infringement is judged as valid, than what are we discussing?

1. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1361888

Reply on news.ycombinator.com