on 2012-08-25 15:39 Darren Addy wrote
I'm sure that most of you know that patents exist to reward innovators and stimulate innovation, for the good of society.
that is indeed the intent of the patent system, but most _software_ patents are issued to large corporations and are often issued for fairly obvious methods and without the Patent Office doing a proper job reviewing prior art; if another big corp wants to challenge a patent's validity, it can afford to try, but small firms and individuals can't afford to even think about it — instead they have to watch their step whenever they create something new, even to the point of avoiding innovation; software patents have become the munitions for a bizarre war of attrition that does nothing to benefit ordinary people
in general i don't think software patents should exist; nor patents for genes
Presumably most of you are in favor of Pentax being granted patents on their innovations and would have an opinion if some other company "lifted them" to Pentax's detriment.
non-software patents are generally more meaningful; i would assume that covers the majority of Pentax patents
Frankly, it seems like some of you hear the word "Apple" and your heads disappear up your arses.
i think you must have no idea where my comment was coming from … it really has little to do with Apple for me; in many ways i am a consummate Apple user, but i'm not a fanboi (maybe i was 20 years ago), and my view of Apple is pretty nuanced; this case bothers me because of how it will scare all the little people and possibly put a major damper on Android; i don't use Android, and i don't see it as living up to the "open" label it's been given, but i like that it is a real competitor for iOS
-- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
