Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Seeks Patent On Brain-Based Development
theodp writes "With its just-published patent application for Developing Software Components Based on Brain Lateralization, Microsoft provides yet another example of just how broken the patent system is. Microsoft argues that its 'invention' of having a Program Manager act as an arbitrator/communicator between a group of right-brained software users and left-brained software developers mimics 'the way that the brain communicates between its two distinct hemispheres.' One of the 'inventors' is Ray Ozzie's Technical Strategist. If granted, the patent could be used to exclude others from making, using, or selling the 'invention' for 17 years."
Usually it's not the concept of Microsoft's software that's all that bad, it's the specific implementation. This makes sure that their implementation is always the only one out there.
Also, patenting something based on the brain is ridiculous. Might as well patent "bi pedal motion", sue everyone in the world and get it over with.
1) This is only an application. Any dumbass can file an application so long as he pays the fees.
2) The poster doesn't even know how long patents last, let alone anything relating to what is *actually* wrong with the patent system.
Just my two eurocents (since they hold their value better).
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Only in America.
Not hardly. The madness is spreading.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
First of all we should get rid of software patents. They are ridiculous, like patents on math.
...or so I've been told.
Is Microsoft only a victim?
Haven't they implied on more than one occasion that Linux is violating X patents?
That sure doesn't sound like a victim...
*Ahem.*
"True geeks" are interested in ideas for their own sake; money---although a certain amount is necessary for survival, and a bit more is desirable for comfort & security---is a secondary concern. And it's obvious you know absolutely nothing about mathematical culture if you would seriously consider the notion of patenting a theory or its proof; mathematicians, perhaps more than anyone else, understand the wisdom of Ben Franklin's words: "As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously."
+3 Insightful? WTF?
Every mathemathical truth is obvious, since it follows from the postulates. And every algorithm is obvious in hindsight.
Simple to whom ? The patent examiner, who gets to read the obfuscated patent claim ?
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.