Slashdot Mirror


Courts May Revisit Software Patents

An anonymous reader writes "It looks like the courts may finally be gearing up to overturn the ruling that opened the floodgates for both software and business model patents. It's been nearly ten years since the US courts decided that business methods were patentable and that most software could be patentable — and we've all seen what's happened since then. With all the efforts to fix the patent system lately, it appears that the court that originally made that decision may be regretting it, and has agreed to hear a new case that could overturn that ruling and restore some sanity to the patent system."

4 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Hurrah! Information will be free by zarthrag · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Consumers have everything to gain from this. Nowadays it's impossible to write a gui'd "hello world" without stepping through a minefield of patents. As a small business owner, it's unreasonable and likely impossible to expect me to research every patent and pay royalties/license fees for "a piece of software that beeps when it wants the user's attention", or other things. Only large companies can afford such things, and they use it stifle competition. (What do you think MS's sabre rattling over linux has been about?)

    Any CS person will tell you that when it comes to software, there's more than one way to skin a cat - probably thousands. But software/business patents let you find one, and squash the rest.

    --
    Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
  2. No bets by canuck57 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    a new case that could overturn that ruling and restore some sanity to the patent system

    No bets here, lawyers enjoy the complexity and confusion too much to make this any better. Congress just needs to change the law. In a business like computers which is evolving so quickly, say a 2 year patent then it expires. And you can only sue if you produce a competing product with it and have been harmed.

    You need to stop patent trolls dead. Like RAID and bugs. Let innovation back into this business.

  3. Carefully-placed regrets by overshoot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    With all the efforts to fix the patent system lately, it appears that the court that originally made that decision may be regretting it, and has agreed to hear a new case that could overturn that ruling and restore some sanity to the patent system.
    The CAFC may not be regretting its decisions, but it's been getting some pretty blunt signals from the USSC that they are not totally pleased with what the CAFC has done while on a long break from supervision. This is one of two things:
    • A rethink to head off not only having their wrists smacked but having the USSC start reviewing their cases much more often (complete with reversals) or
    • A chance to put together a really solid and detailed ruling to give the USSC a reason to agree with them.
    We won't know which they pick until this summer.
    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  4. Re:It'll never happen... by ultima · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent:

    A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state to an inventor or his assignee for a fixed period of time in exchange for a disclosure of an invention.

    Patents, from the beginning, were a compromise so that people who would invest in new developments would disclose the work of those developments (for public good) while being able to turn a profit from them in the short term (a motivation for inventing) through an exclusive monopoly.

    Vested interests do not write the law, for it is the individual who has the most vested interest in the government. I think you mean to say "sociopathic capitalists write the law".

    For patents to benefit society, the term of the monopoly must be greater than that required to recoup investment expenses, but shorter than the portion of an invention's life span where it is valuable to the people. In a government that exists for the benefit of the people, the shortest patent term is the most desirable. That's how our government was set up -- unfortunately, the world is more and more getting exactly what it deserves, as a few have learned that people will sell their freedom for remarkably little.

    People can't own their ideas because they were never wholly their ideas. All that we invent is the summation of all that has come before us, perhaps with something new thrown into the mix. Your ideas belong just as much to your teachers, your parents, your peers, and the generations that came before you, as they do to you. In the long term community ownership is the only system that makes sense for such a creation.

    In the short term, a man's got to eat. In the long term, society as a whole must reap the rewards for what it has sown. Only a parasite keeps that from society, and like any parasite feasting on a host, society becomes sick when that happens.