inignoct wrote:
] the Post (no, not NY) takes a stab at patent issues...
]
] ] Intel's Grove derides such patent holders for showing
] ] little interest in producing goods with their inventions
] ] in favor of demanding licensing fees from others. "We
] ] call them trolls," he said.
] ]
] ]
] ] Acacia's patents lay dormant for 10 years, until the
] ] original company was bought out by some of its minority
] ] investors. Management is now making it one of many
] ] companies specializing in the business of generating
] ] money from patents, rather than using them to develop
] ] products directly.
] ]
] ]
] ] Robert A. Berman, general counsel for Acacia, said that
] ] many inventors and companies don't have the
] ] sophistication, expertise or money to commercialize their
] ] inventions.
]
] seems to me like they should try to find someone who has those
] things, if they don't, and licence the technology to a
] developer. something feels wrong with a company finding a
] patent, letting it sit idle until someone else independently
] comes up with the idea AND makes the effort to commercialize
] it, and then smack them after the fact. It certainly doesn't
] seem to benefit the actual inventor, who in many cases is an
] engineer who's long gone.
]
] i could argue the other side too, but i'll leave that to
] someone else... it's a complex issue.
]
]
] the article also contains a quote from one CEO opining that 20
] years of monopoly rights on software is "asinine to the point
] of ludicrosity". can't argue with that.

While I agree in general with the irritating lack of development in this country as it is stagnating our economy, and while I agree that software patents are terribly blunt instruments, I have a problem with this view from a legal side. If you invent something new, have IP counsel determine if it is already patented! And don't give me the startup argument either-- all in all, its not an expensive proposition. Besides, its not like you can't search for it: http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html

BTW: this was officially a snap judgment post-- i didn't actually read the article, I was just responding to the post and comment!

RE: washingtonpost.com: Patenting Air or Protecting Property?