hmmm, so I looked into this whole Rackspace vs Parallel Iron that this stems from and learned this: 1) Parallel Iron is a company that isn't a shell company but owned by the lead inventor (see U.S. patent 7,958,388) 2)…
You've made 2 wrong assumptions: 1) data structures are patentable. Where is your proof that pure data structure not tied to hardware or a specific problem are? 2) independent invention happens all the time. Actually,…
About as hard to prove direct correlation as for you to prove the opposite. However, use common sense. The data is overwhelmingly in my favor.
That's a cop-out given the abundance of search tools, regexp, CTRL-F, etc...
not so long ago (few hundred years) the new world (America) was behind African infrastructure and yet pulled itself up.
That's assuming the article is right, but a look around the world shows the opposite - generally speaking the stronger the patent rights, the stronger the innovation. Weak IP African countries vs strong IP in American,…
Patents provide the incentive to invest in R&D by providing a form of guarantee on their investments. Generally speaking, the countries with the strongest patent rights produce many of the innovative companies.
Not really, 1) Google wants into mobile more than Apple wants into search or ads, and 2) Apple has more mobile patents.
events from the past couple of years have changed all of that. These numbers support that.
Google more than Apple is a sign of things to come.
I see, "troll" because I don't conform to your opinion. What is this, slashdot? > Try asking it to prove that the economic prosperity is caused by the patent system rather than merely correlated. About as provable…
which element do you want me to support?: 1) R&D costs money 2) investors look for return on their investment 3) corporations continuously look to reduce costs Perhaps it is you who is continuing the echo chamber.
R&D costs money, and lots of it. So in the end, patents provided the incentive to innovate and $spend on R&D in America, and now free for all to copy. Without patents, smart investors will start to look at where…
what exactly have Cuban or Minecraft innovated?
Provide incentives to publish innovations instead of trade secrets. Allow others to stand on shoulders of giants.
You won't be able to create an exception for software not to be patentable. It's over, get used to it and move on.
hmmm, so I looked into this whole Rackspace vs Parallel Iron that this stems from and learned this: 1) Parallel Iron is a company that isn't a shell company but owned by the lead inventor (see U.S. patent 7,958,388) 2)…
You've made 2 wrong assumptions: 1) data structures are patentable. Where is your proof that pure data structure not tied to hardware or a specific problem are? 2) independent invention happens all the time. Actually,…
About as hard to prove direct correlation as for you to prove the opposite. However, use common sense. The data is overwhelmingly in my favor.
That's a cop-out given the abundance of search tools, regexp, CTRL-F, etc...
not so long ago (few hundred years) the new world (America) was behind African infrastructure and yet pulled itself up.
That's assuming the article is right, but a look around the world shows the opposite - generally speaking the stronger the patent rights, the stronger the innovation. Weak IP African countries vs strong IP in American,…
Patents provide the incentive to invest in R&D by providing a form of guarantee on their investments. Generally speaking, the countries with the strongest patent rights produce many of the innovative companies.
Not really, 1) Google wants into mobile more than Apple wants into search or ads, and 2) Apple has more mobile patents.
events from the past couple of years have changed all of that. These numbers support that.
Google more than Apple is a sign of things to come.
I see, "troll" because I don't conform to your opinion. What is this, slashdot? > Try asking it to prove that the economic prosperity is caused by the patent system rather than merely correlated. About as provable…
which element do you want me to support?: 1) R&D costs money 2) investors look for return on their investment 3) corporations continuously look to reduce costs Perhaps it is you who is continuing the echo chamber.
R&D costs money, and lots of it. So in the end, patents provided the incentive to innovate and $spend on R&D in America, and now free for all to copy. Without patents, smart investors will start to look at where…
what exactly have Cuban or Minecraft innovated?
Provide incentives to publish innovations instead of trade secrets. Allow others to stand on shoulders of giants.
You won't be able to create an exception for software not to be patentable. It's over, get used to it and move on.