Microsoft patents the doubleclick

[Wytter]

Link

 

Hmm, pretty peculiar patent system, don't you think? I doubt that patent would be worth anything in the courts though.

[Cicero]

It seems that there's been a rush on the patent office for things that are obvious and have significant prior art because the patent office is too busy to actually check on anything. I should try to patent breathing. I could probably get it too. Anything even remotely obfuscated would get past a patent clerk. "Dihydrogen monoxide" would also probably get past without anyone blinking.

 

http://www.dhmo.org/

[Wytter]

*Goes to patent Polyethylen and a device for keeping fluid Dihydrogen Monoxide*

[Tropicano]

thats just sick... (goes to control panel and chooses "open folder with one click") now they cant get me

[Selecter]

Crazy system

[Killerlamb]

OH SHIT! I DOUBLE CLICKED!

I've failed you family, I'm so sorry...They will take everything

[Entropy]

I think that MS should suck my/our dick. if they piss me off, I'll patent the MMORPG.

[ShadowKnight]

The patent system really needs to be redone. It is quite easy to abuse. For instance, oil companies place patents on fuel efficient cars and hold that patent so that the car can't be developed. Also, they often do patent stacking. Say the time limit on a patent is almost up. Competitors of whoever owns it would be able to create their own version of that product. What companies will do is place a new patent on some aspect of that product. So if someone had a patent on the computer and it was almost up, they would patent the motherboard.

[Guest Toyminator]

But that motherboard wont be the same

[ShadowKnight]

I was trying to make up an example. So please respond to what I was trying to say rather than scrutinizing my example.

[Entropy]

When you patent something, you have to be specific, you can't patent thigns such as a concept. So, if you patent this type of motherboard, you can design a different type of motherboard, and you are free to use it.

As for the fuel efficient car patents, I don't think there is such a patent, because not all the countries in the world adhere to the same conventions, so that would result in some countries building very fuel efficient cars, which is not the case.

[xavier1]

When you patent something, you have to be specific, you can't patent thigns such as a concept.

 

A pharmaceutical company can patent a drug for a certain amount of time and not allow other companies to make a generic brand. (Even though the chemical makeup is different from the the original) In theory what they are doing is preventing variations. Imagine if that same principal was applied to technologies today.

[Entropy]

You patent METHODS not CONCEPTS.

[xavier1]

Utility patents may be granted to anyone who invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, article of manufacture, or compositions of matters, or any new useful improvement thereof;

 

Design patents may be granted to anyone who invents a new, original, and ornamental design for an article of manufacture; and

 

Plant patents may be granted to anyone who invents or discovers and asexually reproduces any distinct and new variety of plants

[Entropy]

Yes, but you can't patent something unless you explain in detail how it works.

I can't patent: "OMFG i am thinking of teh fastest CPU evar!!~@! I patent the CPUs that are higher than 5 GHZ!!`!!"

[Wytter]

And there must not be examples of prior usage/invention!

Sadly, with the current overburdened (incompetent?) patent office it's even possible to patent the wheel (I think that this was done by an Australian not too many years ago)

[Entropy]

I think that if a patent is blatantely ofesnive, such as patenting things that are known for decades, or even worse, milleniums, then they can't be valid if challanged.

[Wytter]

Exactly - I think that the patents would be rendered invalid if they went to court with them, as the patents should never have been declared valid.

 

But it's sad to see the pattern - Microsoft have apparently seen that they cannot beat the pace of Open Source software - but they can beat open source software in terms of economical ressources, and that's exactly why they're spending loads of money to get patents for almost everything that's already in competitive OS (Heh, they even patented the 3D desktop and a function similiar to Expose of Mac OS X). I just hope that IBM and their lawyers (known as the Nazgul =) ) would be able to stand up for Open Source should the day come where Microsoft decides to sue OSS for patent infringement.

[Entropy]

Let's not forget that EU doesn't recognize software related patents, so at most MS would force the OSS teams to move their stuff on european servers. Of course the US companies that make money from OSS will be affected, but the overall OSS community won't.

[ShadowKnight]

I say let them waste money. Seriously, isn't it enough to have like 75% of all computers running Windows??? Now they are starting to use dirty tactics to get rid of their competition. This probably isn't getting them any money, and is ruining their image even further. Not only that, but if they try too hard to get rid of their competition, they then have to deal with the U.S. Government and antitrust/monopoly laws.

If not for the fact that you almost never have to worry about compatability with Windows, i'm sure a lot of people would turn to other, better OS's.

[Wytter]

It's actually 94-96% of all desktop computers that are running Windows - that's only measured by the western countries, and we do know that most of the Chinese run GNU/Linux based computers, so this is most likely highly overrated - but still it's sad that so many western computers are running a proprietary OS now that there is a free alternative - many people could switch to a GNU/Linux desktop and be satisfied, but gamers etc. will most likely not switch before the gaming industry opens their eyes towards GNU/Linux and starts porting their games to GNU/Linux (Ack Loki, where art thou).

 

But it is a problem that they're patenting everything ever developed - they have the money to get the patents and the money to buy themselves enourmous teams of lawyers, and it seems that the only thing that could break them is governments and administrations like USA and EU, who are monitoring their activity closely. Microsoft is not doing anything against the law though by getting these patents - that's why the law and the patent offices needs a new revision.