Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Wants More Credit for Inventions

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the without-microsoft-around-no-one-would-think-of-it dept.

theodp writes "Bill Gates said Thursday that Microsoft expects to file 3,000 patent applications this year, up from a little over 2,000 last year and 1,000 just a few years ago. 'We think--patent for patent--what we are doing is, if anything, more important than what others are doing,' said Gates, perhaps referring to 'Organizing and displaying photographs based on time,' which the USPTO published just hours before Gates spoke."

3 of 422 comments (clear)

  1. Patent madness! All ideas MUST go!! by homeobocks · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As the old adage states, in its many forms, that the one thing ``they'' can't take away from you is knowledge. While true, Microsoft can still own it.

    --
    MOUNT TAPE U1439 ON B3, NO RING
  2. patently obvious by uncreativ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I know this has been ranted about on slashdot, but why are patently obvious procedures patentable?

    I'd be curious if anyone can suggest a good rule for eliminating obvious patents. Perhaps a rule that states that a method which mimics electonically what is done by other means cannot itself justify issuing a patent.

    In the referrring patent, Microsoft pretty much has patented the procedure for looking at things with dates on them and sorting them in order of the date. Now, I understand if Microsoft patents the method they used to extract date information encoded into a photograph, but this patent is way too broad.

  3. Re:Experience tells me... by john82 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I recognize your sarcasm, however reading the patent reveals that Microsoft lists GPS information repeatedly. There are several references to it in fact making the assumption that one day photos will incorporate, in their format or metadata, GPS data. At that point Microsoft will naturally assert that this new patent includes sorting by GPS as well.

    CONCLUSION

    [0072] Although the systems and methods have been described in language specific to structural features and/or procedures, it is to be understood that the invention defined in the appended claims is not necessarily limited to the specific features or procedures described. Rather, the specific features and procedures are disclosed as exemplary forms of implementing the claimed invention.

    If we let anything out, yeah we meant that too. All your ideas are belong to us.