Shocker: Man With First Software Patent Defends Software Patents
Well, using other people’s knowledge and work. But let’s disregard for a moment the fact that anything he ever created built upon other code. He goes on to saying something which in no way contradicts the fact that software is mathematics and in fact reinforces this fact. For example: “Highly skilled personnel are employed in these companies and many have advanced computer science degrees, including PhDs. And because of their complexity, many programs are written using software engineering disciplines.”
Or mathematics? And equations? Seriously, scientific programming is all about formulating rules and applying them in code. Do we want a monopoly on rules that are immutable? “When these programs are inventions,” he claims (whatever “invention” actually means), “patent protection is important to help protect these companies’ investments.”
Look up the Star7 prototype. Touch screens, and color icons, were around in 1992 - nearly 20 years ago. Also kinetic scrolling and many other "Apple inventions. " And the JooJoo/Crunchpad had rounded corners.
It's okay to fail, but I often get the idea that google just makes a lot of half-hearted efforts. I cannot even tell you many google projects have come and gone. If google puts something out there, and it's not a cash cow; it will suck so bad that it's not even usable, and then get cancled.
It sickens me that companies like Apple and Samsung are flinging patents around
Do not blame Samsung. This is 100% Apple's fault. Samsung is doing nothing more than trying to defend itself against an evil, abusive, monopolist. If somebody got mugged in an ally, would you critize that person for trying to fight back?
If that's true, then siding with Apple will just promote the system that you descripe. Apple represents abusive monopolies through influence, corruption, and abuse of the patent systems, and legal systems.
The difference is that Google have pretty much a clean track record when it comes to open source software.
I don't think so. Chrome was marketed as an open source browser, yet from the very first release they added in proprietary bits without source code.
Even if that were true, I don't see Google acting like a predatory patent troll, out to ruin foss projects because those projects compete with Google's proprietary offerings. Which means that Google is not behaving like Apple, Oracle, or Microsoft.
But Dart is controlled WHOLLY by Google. Why is that really any different or better?
You're kidding right? Have you seen any aggressive patent trolling from Google? How about Oracle, Apple, and Microsoft?
The reality for Java is much better, it's controlled by a community standards body (the JCP). Oracle can provide direction but they are NOT in control the way Microsoft and Google are.
I guess Oracle didn't get the memo. You have heard of Oracle's lawsuit against Google, right?
How about being a ruthless patent troll? How about being scared to death of competing on value, and instead scamming the legal system to use "Tonya Harding" tactics on the competition?
We would certainly have the telephone with Alexander Graham Bell, and we certainly have powered flight without the Wright brothers, and I could go on.
Apple did not invent: the personal computer, the gui, the online music store, the portable mp3 player, the smart phone, or tablet computing. Oh sure, Apple made contributions, but can we definitively say that only Apple could have made those contributions? I don't think so.
Amazon is selling a vendor-locked ebook reader. No camera, no bluetooth, no sim slot, no GPS, no ability to read ePub, no google apps, no google android market, and so on.
The A1 is already on sale, and has all that stuff that the Fire lacks.
Slashdot Mirror
MS would just say that the hw makers decided to do it. Besides, MS never gets more than a slap on the wrist.
Why would MS do this? The same reasons that MS funded the scox-scam, and bribed officials in the OOXML scam.
Shocker: Man With First Software Patent Defends Software Patents
Well, using other people’s knowledge and work. But let’s disregard for a moment the fact that anything he ever created built upon other code. He goes on to saying something which in no way contradicts the fact that software is mathematics and in fact reinforces this fact. For example: “Highly skilled personnel are employed in these companies and many have advanced computer science degrees, including PhDs. And because of their complexity, many programs are written using software engineering disciplines.”
Or mathematics? And equations? Seriously, scientific programming is all about formulating rules and applying them in code. Do we want a monopoly on rules that are immutable? “When these programs are inventions,” he claims (whatever “invention” actually means), “patent protection is important to help protect these companies’ investments.”
http://techrights.org/2011/10/31/martin-goetz-mistakes/
One difference: if Ballmer is fired, he will be replaced by another long-time MS executive. IBM does the same sort of thing.
HP is different. HP hires outsiders from completely different sorts of businesses.
How is google being sued for using free software?
Look up the Star7 prototype. Touch screens, and color icons, were around in 1992 - nearly 20 years ago. Also kinetic scrolling and many other "Apple inventions. " And the JooJoo/Crunchpad had rounded corners.
Oops. I meant to say:
The JooJoo/Crunchpad had rounded corners.
Here is a demo of the Star7:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahg8OBYixL0
The JooJoo/Crunchpad had rounded. The Strar7 prototype (1992) had a a touchscreen, color icons, kinetic scrolling, and wireless access.
I think Mint is going to change to Gnome 3. Not Unity, but not much better.
But why? Why not just get Debian and install whatever you want?
It's okay to fail, but I often get the idea that google just makes a lot of half-hearted efforts. I cannot even tell you many google projects have come and gone. If google puts something out there, and it's not a cash cow; it will suck so bad that it's not even usable, and then get cancled.
It sickens me that companies like Apple and Samsung are flinging patents around
Do not blame Samsung. This is 100% Apple's fault. Samsung is doing nothing more than trying to defend itself against an evil, abusive, monopolist. If somebody got mugged in an ally, would you critize that person for trying to fight back?
If that's true, then siding with Apple will just promote the system that you descripe. Apple represents abusive monopolies through influence, corruption, and abuse of the patent systems, and legal systems.
It's not about Amazon, it's about the US patent system.
The news is: it hurts everybody else. It stifles innovation, and makes life nearly impossible for some start-ups.
The difference is that Google have pretty much a clean track record when it comes to open source software.
I don't think so. Chrome was marketed as an open source browser, yet from the very first release they added in proprietary bits without source code.
Even if that were true, I don't see Google acting like a predatory patent troll, out to ruin foss projects because those projects compete with Google's proprietary offerings. Which means that Google is not behaving like Apple, Oracle, or Microsoft.
So you can use it without being sued. Too bad the folks at Oracle are such dicks. I thought Java was supposed to free?
The SCO claimed to own C++.
Since when has Google taken anything from Microsoft's playbook? I don't see Google patent trolling, or astroturfing, like Microsoft routinely does.
Apparently, Google believes that patent trolling is not in their best long term interest. This sets Google apart from Apple, Microsoft, and Oracle.
But Dart is controlled WHOLLY by Google. Why is that really any different or better?
You're kidding right? Have you seen any aggressive patent trolling from Google? How about Oracle, Apple, and Microsoft?
The reality for Java is much better, it's controlled by a community standards body (the JCP). Oracle can provide direction but they are NOT in control the way Microsoft and Google are.
I guess Oracle didn't get the memo. You have heard of Oracle's lawsuit against Google, right?
What's Jobs guilty of?
How about being a ruthless patent troll? How about being scared to death of competing on value, and instead scamming the legal system to use "Tonya Harding" tactics on the competition?
Maybe we would be where we are now.
We would certainly have the telephone with Alexander Graham Bell, and we certainly have powered flight without the Wright brothers, and I could go on.
Apple did not invent: the personal computer, the gui, the online music store, the portable mp3 player, the smart phone, or tablet computing. Oh sure, Apple made contributions, but can we definitively say that only Apple could have made those contributions? I don't think so.
Oops. Sorry, I got the names confused.
BTW: there is nothing odd about hatred for Apple (or love for Apple).
Sorry but patenting rounded corners, then suing suing Samsung is certainly a scam. And Apple has been doing that sort of thing for decades.
Amazon is selling a vendor-locked ebook reader. No camera, no bluetooth, no sim slot, no GPS, no ability to read ePub, no google apps, no google android market, and so on.
The A1 is already on sale, and has all that stuff that the Fire lacks.
http://www.lenovo.com/products/us/tablet/ideapad/a1?AID=10383968&PID=4485850&SID=u0t3389034f9fp0dd0c0s590&CJURL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lenovo.com%2Fproducts%2Fus%2Ftablet%2Fideapad%2Fa1