I did have one patent. I did not renew it, because it really wasn't very good in it's details and I moved on to other things. But I feel it's pretty obvious that the review process has become rather lax, when someone can patent business processes, for example. I think the not-obvious requirement is very subjective and subsequently we get patents that might not be obvious to a layperson, but which are a bit too general for the public welfare. I think any combination of presenting data and accepting input should not be patentable, as a *concept*. As a device, fine. As an algorithm, maybe. But not as some sort of vague idea to aggregate auction listings or something. I think prior art reviews are very lax as well. It's basically run as many through as possible and let the lawyers sort it out. Pretty tough for an individual to participate in that process.
I'm pretty sure GE is the leading wind turbine manufacturer in the world, since acquiring a Spanish company fairly recently.
But the patent system has become a joke.
"You are correct, that's what should have happened. The fact that it didn't indicates that there was some major problem with the logic of the grid. It would have been far better to cut the power to thousands of customers than millions."
You explained it a lot better than I did.:)
nonsense. If you live adjacent to a power plant that would be working just fine except for a sorry-arsed control system that can't limit the load to that plant, you would justifiably be miffed. Think about it. It's like chaining a bunch of boats together so they get there at the same time. If one of them sinks? oops we didn't think of putting a release on the chain...
Slashdot Mirror
I did have one patent. I did not renew it, because it really wasn't very good in it's details and I moved on to other things. But I feel it's pretty obvious that the review process has become rather lax, when someone can patent business processes, for example. I think the not-obvious requirement is very subjective and subsequently we get patents that might not be obvious to a layperson, but which are a bit too general for the public welfare. I think any combination of presenting data and accepting input should not be patentable, as a *concept*. As a device, fine. As an algorithm, maybe. But not as some sort of vague idea to aggregate auction listings or something. I think prior art reviews are very lax as well. It's basically run as many through as possible and let the lawyers sort it out. Pretty tough for an individual to participate in that process.
I'm pretty sure GE is the leading wind turbine manufacturer in the world, since acquiring a Spanish company fairly recently. But the patent system has become a joke.
"You are correct, that's what should have happened. The fact that it didn't indicates that there was some major problem with the logic of the grid. It would have been far better to cut the power to thousands of customers than millions." You explained it a lot better than I did. :)
nonsense. If you live adjacent to a power plant that would be working just fine except for a sorry-arsed control system that can't limit the load to that plant, you would justifiably be miffed. Think about it. It's like chaining a bunch of boats together so they get there at the same time. If one of them sinks? oops we didn't think of putting a release on the chain...
Thanks!
In our culture, it's more like - "so how many children do you have?"
Too bad he's right.