Now you can't design something without worrying that another company will hear of its existence and patent it with no intention of developing it.
Actually, secrecy has always been important if you want to patent something. You're invention has to be new in the sense that it is not known by the rest of the world. You don't just have to worry about the competition patenting your invention but you must make sure the invention is kept secret or the "novelty" is destroied.
If someone else can come up with the same idea then the patent application should be revoked.
This seems a bit drastic, I think. The point is that someone invented something first. That someone else could, or happens to, reinvent it out of ignorance should hardly be grounds for revoking the patent. Then all patents would be useless. However, I agree with you in the sense that the invention has to be non-obvious, which is also a requirement for registration in most countries.
From what I've heard, IBM use them to force licensing deals. When someone has a technology they want, IBM says, hey, you're infringing our patent so and so and they get a cross licensing deal. Thus, they get to use other people's technology without paying licenes. Most companies, not to mention individuals, are not prepared to fight someone like IBM in a case like that.
Technically, all users would have used unlicensed code. If someone "wrongfully" put the code in Linux, any licensing they did would be invalid since they had no right to do that. Thus, the code would be unlicensed. You cannot release my code under the GPL.
It's the same here in Sweden. The maximum time is around 2 years (in practise it's more like 1 year for most people) and the (ex) employee has to be compensated.
Slashdot Mirror
"If you do not want the company's reply to be seen, then you are stifling *their* free speech,"
How? You mean the company doesn't have the resources to get their messages out?
It could indeed be very hard to reach the same audience.
Now you can't design something without worrying that another company will hear of its existence and patent it with no intention of developing it.
Actually, secrecy has always been important if you want to patent something. You're invention has to be new in the sense that it is not known by the rest of the world. You don't just have to worry about the competition patenting your invention but you must make sure the invention is kept secret or the "novelty" is destroied.
If someone else can come up with the same idea then the patent application should be revoked.
This seems a bit drastic, I think. The point is that someone invented something first. That someone else could, or happens to, reinvent it out of ignorance should hardly be grounds for revoking the patent. Then all patents would be useless. However, I agree with you in the sense that the invention has to be non-obvious, which is also a requirement for registration in most countries.
Why do you think IBM has 30,000 patents?
From what I've heard, IBM use them to force licensing deals. When someone has a technology they want, IBM says, hey, you're infringing our patent so and so and they get a cross licensing deal. Thus, they get to use other people's technology without paying licenes. Most companies, not to mention individuals, are not prepared to fight someone like IBM in a case like that.
Technically, all users would have used unlicensed code. If someone "wrongfully" put the code in Linux, any licensing they did would be invalid since they had no right to do that. Thus, the code would be unlicensed. You cannot release my code under the GPL.
It's the same here in Sweden. The maximum time is around 2 years (in practise it's more like 1 year for most people) and the (ex) employee has to be compensated.