View Single Post
Old 05-22-2007, 04:01 PM   #4
RWood
Technogeezer
RWood ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RWood ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RWood ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RWood ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RWood ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RWood ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RWood ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RWood ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RWood ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RWood ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RWood ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
RWood's Avatar
 
Posts: 7,233
Karma: 1596436
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Virginia, USA
Device: Sony PRS-500
One reason MS may not go after the "violations" is that they are afraid of losing. Many patents have been granted, as the writer pointed out, for self evident things. (One wag once submitted an application for the ice cube.)

In many ways MS is like the old line book publishers fighting to keep their old business model.

Patents do serve a valid purpose, they were never designed to stop development or keep innovation from the market. Yet, that is exactly what has happened in software patents. I understand Intel getting a process patent on a way to manufacture a new chip. I do not understand someone getting a patent on putting an auction online. (I wrote an auction program in dBase II under CP/M back in 1982 for a dial-in 300 baud modem. Wonder if I can challenge the patent?)
RWood is offline   Reply With Quote