Breaking News
Comments
Oldest First | Newest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
prabhakar_deosthali
User Rank
CEO
Dear Editor
prabhakar_deosthali   6/20/2014 2:33:04 AM
NO RATINGS
This looks to be some kind of SPAM!

prabhakar_deosthali
User Rank
CEO
Re: Jual Es Krim
prabhakar_deosthali   6/20/2014 7:56:14 AM
NO RATINGS
I was referring to this comment as SPAM

DrFPGA
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Jual Es Krim
DrFPGA   6/20/2014 12:13:04 PM
NO RATINGS
Yep- we need a way for a comment to flag possible spam. Can that be added? Maybe the Rate It button could include 'SPAM' as an option...

sixscrews
User Rank
Manager
About time
sixscrews   6/20/2014 1:03:51 PM
Patents are for things you can hold in your hand or, at least, have a physical existence either in hardware or software that affects the external hardware.  Patents that cover a numinous exchange of undefined ideas aren't patents - they are junk that clogs up the system and more food for trolls.

For once the Supremes got it right.

ss/wb

LarryM99
User Rank
CEO
Re: About time
LarryM99   6/20/2014 4:18:13 PM
NO RATINGS
Agreed. At one point I accepted the argument that strong patent protection was the mark of an advanced business environment, but I now realize that too much of it is the mark of one that is in decline. Having a good idea at some point in the past doesn't mean that you get to live off it indefinitely. That also applies to Disney, particularly since they are mostly living off of stuff that they stole from the public domain in the first place.

Larry M.

przem
User Rank
Manager
Re: About time
przem   6/20/2014 5:49:36 PM
NO RATINGS
One of the problems with the fashionable Intelectual Property concept is that it commingles patents, copyrights and trademarks. Disney is all about copyrights---I don't think they have many patents, especially in the high tech area. Having said that, they do indeed make excessive use of various extensions granted in the copyright law, in my opinion.

I will grant you a point that both patents and copyrights are being stretched and abused beyond their original role. The basic copyright and patent protections are reasonable---it's just all the amendments and tweaks that the influential players lobbied for and procured that are hurting us.

anon8743502537
User Rank
Rookie
An Intellectually Bankrupt Opinion
anon8743502537   6/20/2014 11:36:31 PM
NO RATINGS
I think judge Thomas put a pubic hair in my software patents.

This decision provides no guidance whatsoever on what is "too abstract."  Why should software be treated differently from other methods?  The patent statutes clearly allow methods to be patented and isn't most software just methods performed on a computer?

The Supreme Court sidesteped precedent in Diamond v Diehr that stated that the novelty of claim steps should not be considered when evaluating whether a claim is statutory.

They used Mayo v Prometheus as a template and seem to say that automating a manual process is not sufficient to meet the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101. Why they didn't use 103 is anyone's guess.

The court here conflated the issues of obviousness (35 USC 103) and statutory subject matter (35 USC 101).  They are supposed to be two separate inquiries.  If these claims were so conventional, other than the addition of the computer, they should have been invalidated using 35 USC 103 as being obvious.  But the claims were not that obvious in my opinion.  By using a computer, the order of certain steps was changed due to the speed of the computer.

I have included a more in depth analysis of this case in my history of software patents at patentsusa.blogspot.com

 

Sanjib.A
User Rank
CEO
Software patent
Sanjib.A   6/21/2014 1:30:03 PM
NO RATINGS
" The justices ruled that the software was generic and did not make technical advancements or improve how the computer functioned." It talks about anything that does not improve the technology behind how the computer functions today would not be eligible for winning a patent. The statement itself sounds very broad to me. The same could be applicable for the hardware too...correct? I am not sure if I have understood correctly...e.g. how about innovations/novelties related to how the data is presented to the users?

Crusty1
User Rank
CEO
Re: Jual Es Krim
Crusty1   6/21/2014 2:26:43 PM
NO RATINGS
But would that improvement be a subject for patent? However good idea

rick merritt
User Rank
Blogger
Hard/soft distinctions
rick merritt   6/22/2014 8:10:02 AM
NO RATINGS
Don't we in the tech industry think of hardware and software distinctions as blurred these days? A chip is several lines of RTL code. 

Isn't the court behind the commercial reality?

Page 1 / 3   >   >>


Flash Poll
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
Max Maxfield

MSGEQ7-Based DIY Audio Spectrum Analyzer: Testing
Max Maxfield
13 comments
In my previous column on this topic, we discussed the step-by-step construction of the first pass at a MSGEQ7-based DIY audio spectrum analyzer for use in my BADASS Display project. Of ...

Karen Field

June 2014 Cartoon Caption Winner
Karen Field
13 comments
Congratulations to "Wnderer" for submitting the winning caption for our June cartoon, after much heated conversation by our judges, given the plethora of great entries.

Jeremy Cook

Inspection Rejection: Why More Is Less in a Vision System
Jeremy Cook
3 comments
Albert Einstein has been quoted as saying, "Everything should be as simple as possible, but not simpler." I would never claim to have his level of insight -- or such an awesome head of ...

Jeremy Cook

Machine Fixes That Made Me Go 'DUH!'
Jeremy Cook
21 comments
As you can see in my bio at the end of this article, I work as a manufacturing engineer. One of my favorite things that happens on a Friday late in the afternoon is to hear my phone ring ...

Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)