Connect With Us (+1) 646 827 3800

Achieving Influency* Through Long Tail Marketing and Content Optimization

Tag Archives: patent

Business Process Patents. Not Allowed. Unless They Are.

I’ve weighed in with my opinion on patents—particularly software patents—a few times. For the most part, I think software patents are a very bad idea, because they describe process, and process can’t be patented.

Unless, of course, it can be.

“The Facebook Patent” (7,669,123) is one example of a patent that describes a process, but no thing.  Amazon Patent 7,739,139 is even worse in this regard. Both talk about how something works, but don’t actually describe anything that’s been “created” other than an idea. Ideas can’t be patented. Business Process therefore can’t be patented either.

Worse Than Facebook: Amazon Non-Unique Patent 7,739,139

Remember back in February when Facebook was awarded United States Patent 7669123 for Social Networking? Remember how little sense that made? Well, our friends at the United States Patents and Trademarks Office have set the bar for stupidity even higher. Friends, I give you USPTO example # 7,739,139 of not understanding what a patent is, or even what a patent is supposed to be for.

“All Software Should Be Free!” Whaaaaaat?

Wouldn’t it be great if software was free? Heck, wouldn’t it be great if everything was free?

And a better question: am I talking about “free of charge”, or walking a “Free to Be You and Me” metaphor? Dries Buytaert, the founder of Drupal, thinks software should be free.

Since Mr. Buytaert is in the software business I presume he doesn’t mean that literally. And wow . . . imagine if he did! The software patent question we had a chance to look at yesterday when Apple sued HTC and last week when Facebook somehow won the ridiculous patent 7,669,123 just wouldn’t matter.

More Fun with Software Patents: Apple Sues HTC. Who’s Next?

Last week I made some noise about how ridiculous Facebook’s US Patent 7,669,123 is, and asked you to make noise too. Now, Our friends at Apple are showing us a real-world here-and-now example of why software shouldn’t be patentable under most circumstances.

Let me be clear, once again: software isn’t “unique” unless it does something that can’t be done some other way. By definition, then, the only time software should therefore “infringe” is when it uses exactly the same code to do exactly the same thing as what the Patents and Trademarks people call “prior art”. Apple, in suing HTC (manufacturer of the Google Nexus One Smartphone), isn’t so much defending its work or intellectual property as an “idea”.

Patents Must Be Unique. Facebook’s 7,669,123 Isn’t.

Who Wants a Patent? Because they seem to be getting handed out for just about anything.

I’ve long believed that in general software patents are a very bad idea. This week the United States Patents and Trademarks Office set a new record for calling something unique that’s just not anything of the sort.

To start, let me state that I’m not an attorney. That said, I’ve dealt with Intellectual Property for a very long time and successfully defended against a trademark infringement claim when my software Uninstall for Windows was sued by the makers of the program Uninstaller. In fact, I got Uninstaller’s trademark invalidated. It was pretty much a matter of explaining common sense in a calm, rational manner to the USPTO.

When Microsoft Breaks Its Word

OK, stop laughing. The Beast of Redmond has been breaking its word on a variety of things for as long as I can remember. Not news. The next version of Windows will take too long to get here and when it finally arrives will stink (Hello, Vista). At least Windows 7 looks promising, and it took way less time to crank out!

This, though . . . I’ve never seen Microsoft do anything as blatantly ugly as this.





Answer Guy Central Influency and Integrated Marketing, New York NY 10128

 

Copyright © 2004-2013, PC-VIP Inc

Return Home

Connect With Us (+1) 646 827 3800