Microsoft cofounder Paul Allen tries again with patent megasuit
feeds.arstechnica.com
feeds.arstechnica.com
If he is he's a hero.
If not he's a dick.
The problem here is that as long as these suits are lost there is plenty of force behind those that say that 'the system works', so only if Paul Allen would actually win this suit would there be an incentive for such reform. There is no real penalty to bringing a suit like this (other than making a bunch of lawyers richer, but when you need 9 zeros before the comma to express your wealth that's no big deal).
I'm hoping that there is a hidden side to this but I'm having a hard time dreaming up a scenario where this is not a 'win' for Paul Allen either way in retrospect ("I've done this to destroy the patent system" or "I just made a bunch of money"). Maybe he should state his goal? The worst case outcome for the rest of the world is that he wins this stupid suit, the best case outcome for the world is that he really is a greedy patent troll and triggers patent reform.
If he's doing it with that purpose then I'm all for it but since there is a chance that he will make a great deal of money from this I highly doubt it.
It's funny because over the years I lost patience with Microsoft, Gates and Ballmer with Paul Allen being the last hold-out in terms of being respectable. It's a pity to see that soiled in this way, apparently there is no such thing as 'enough' and abusing the system is just A-Ok.
I don't know how anyone thinks this is a good idea.
Do you think that this is unique enough an idea that others should have to pay Paul Allen's company for the rights to use it? This was something that I was going to implement on thingist. Should I not do this because I would be infringing on a legitimate (legitimate in the spirit of patent law) bit of intellectual property?
This is why patent trolling is so damaging to the community. I'm not a lawyer, I have no idea. The best I can do is read the abstract of a patent (if I can even find it) and try not to step on anybody's toes. For somebody like me, a lowly 23 year old kid making side projects in his spare time and day-dreaming about someday moving to San Francisco and getting to hang out at the cool kids table, this stuff is terrifying. Paul Allen, a multi-billionaire with a fleet of private jets and private yachts and private submarines and private multi-million-dollar-per-year-retainer lawyers might SUE ME.
SO I have a couple of choices. I can implement what seems like a completely obvious feature and risk being sued by the largest Goliath in the industry, or I can follow the written law and not.
What should I do? What would you do?
The slips of paper (which have now been scanned into a computer; images of them are now available on the internet) are there to mark the occasion of the first person writing that particular series of symbols down on that particular piece of paper. The idea is that if you write a certain series of symbols down on the paper, you are the only person that is to be allowed to do whatever it was that you described with the symbols. If somebody doesn't know about the occasion of you writing down the symbols and does whatever it was you described (well, in this case, predicted they might do), then you are entitled to a portion of that unlucky person's assets.
The entire thing is absurd, and if you can't see that, then I suggest you devote more time to "understanding how the world around you works".
The abstract is not the patent. It's not meant to be the patent. It's not a legally binding part of the patent. So talking about it in a way that refers to its novelty is just as useful as talking about the novelty of the typeface they used or the brand of paper they used.
Unfortunately, the Vogon Destructor Fleet was not moved by this appeal to reason.
(With apologies to decent attorneys everywhere. Joke too good to pass up.)
It's not Paul Allen we should be complaining about. After all, the patent law makes Intellectual Ventures and Interval Licensing very good ideas as companies. Their business plan is exactly that -- describe some things, then wait a few years, and go litigate.
The Seahawks are in trouble, so he's turning to other interests?
Well that sucks. It would be terrible if I had my phone's services greatly impaired so this guy can go through his little patent suit.
Notification is an area in which iOS is conspicuously lagging behind Android. I wonder if this "peripheral attention" patent has something to do with that.
Why? If a law is wrong, unfair or immoral, taking advantage of it is not right, it is actually wrong. That being said, it is legal, but being legal does not always imply rightness.
So the next phase will be when e.g. Wozniak put up a software patent company and sues Microsoft, Google and Nokia? And then some investors in Google will finance a patent troll company which...
Patent Armageddon, here we come. :-(
During Patent Armageddon, software is going to suck. There will be injunctions on the import and sale of all sorts of products (read: you won't be able to buy shiny new technology, or perhaps even old technology), technological progress will slow down, and being a start up will suck because it will be incredibly beneficial for companies to sue start-ups to build up precedent for their patents. (Note that if this doesn't happen - if there isn't an epic battle over patents - it isn't Armageddon, it's just an apocalypse, being the wide-spread revelation that software patents are horrible things).
Yes, there will be reform, probably large-scale reform. However, it won't come until things get rather bad.
The lawyers won, as usual. They'll win this time, too.
If you're still feeling cynical, you can think of it this way: MS has enough dirt on Allen from his years there to bring him down if he threatens them :-)
Have a few million: can afford, might even make financial sense, assuming you are ok with it ethically.
Have a few billion: why be a patent troll? You have the world's biggest yacht -- do you need 1000 more?
Boggles my mind.