Hacker News Reader

Comment by nhangen | Hacker News Reader

So the post title is tongue in cheek...Marco, you bummed me out once again!

As a small shop, I don't know what I would do, but I do know this - rolling over seems like the worst option.

#1 - I'm infuriated that Apple continues to stand back and watch their developers get attacked. More infuriated that they haven't backed off of their stance that the in-app purchase is the only way to sell something in the app.

#2 - This patent is bullshit, and everyone knows it. Sometimes, you have to do what's right, regardless of the stakes.

View on HN

It's not the worst option at all, it's just the best of a bunch of bad ones. As a small software company CEO I have a fiduciary responsibility to my shareholders to maximize revenue, not to take stands against patent abuse. If my options were pay a small fee to someone who didn't deserve it, or go broke trying to fight it (no matter how right I am) I'm choosing the former.

It's unclear here what is right, even if you assume the patent is total bullshit. Is spending the money your investors gave you, and that your employees depend upon for their livelihoods, to fight a (probably) unjust patent claim right? It seems you're trying to make a right out of two wrongs there. It's certainly foolish from a profit-maximizing standpoint, and it's hard to imagine it's going to have any positive effect on the patent system even if you win.

Your case might be different because you are incorporated (I'm guessing) and in a different position than many indie shops.

In my business, the only shareholder is me, as is the case with many developers that were targeted in this suit. Investors and employees has nothing to do with it.

Lastly, as I said above, this isn't even about winning.

Have to agree on the horrible link-bait title. The article itself talks about another person's rebuttal on Marco's earlier post.

Now if you'll excuse me I am writing a nutrition guide titled "Why You Shouldn't Invest in Higher Education".

The rules on obtaining a patent might be BS, but the patent its self is just as "valid" as Amazon's 1 click ordering. Neither should have been allowed in the first place, but since the courts have decided that software patents are fair, you have to take the good with the bad.

Regarding point #1, something will have to change, but I highly doubt Apple will be giving up their 30%.

Do you think it's possible for Apple to rewrite the API to avoid any hint of infringement on Lodsys's patent?

Re: #2 - so you'll be trying to get sued and win, then? The first part doesn't seem so hard; let me know how the second half goes.

Seriously, it's far too easy to say that someone else should do the right thing.

First, winning has nothing to do with it. I would probably hope to win, and plan on losing.

Second, it's also far too easy to hide and let everyone else do the hard work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com