Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Interesting Points (Score 2) 53

In the case where companies with a large patent portfolio are actually spending billions in R&D, I'd say you have a massive point, and that any claims made by anti-patent folks that patents are stifling innovation would be extremely difficult to substantiate... and that those claims may not even have any basis in fact.

However, in the case of companies with a large patent portfolio that do little to no R&D (with companies whose sole business case is patent trolling being the most obvious case), I would think that the claims made by anti-patent folks would need no substantiation at all...

Comment Re:Oh Patents (Score 1) 53

Exactly.

Right now, the most attractive market (or means of distribution) for a "software tycoon in training" is the smartphone market (specifically Android and iPhone, since their distribution methods have the lowest overhead for the actual software authors).

The LodSys bullshit has definitely left me feeling a little gun-shy...

Comment Re:Interesting Points (Score 5, Insightful) 53

I don't think so.

The argument being made is that securing those rights (at least, using the current methods) doesn't actually promote that progress. So I suppose it could possibly be interpreted that the current system doesn't fulfill the intent of that portion of the constitution. Which might make the current process for obtaining a patent unconstitutional.

However, to claim that it makes patents themselves unconstitutional doesn't seem valid.... but, again, one could draw the conclusion (with a lot more evidence, I'd think) that progress in science and useful arts can't be promoted via granting parties exclusive rights to writings and discoveries at all... which would mean that the portion of the constitution that you quoted would have to be deemed as being sel-conflicting and therefore stricken from the constitution or amended... and while that claim might actually be true, I don't think getting it amended would be easier than revamping the patent system/process

Open Source

Submission + - DOD Releases Open Source Development Guide (pcworld.com)

BrandiCook writes: "The Department of Defense (DoD) has weighed in with its own support for open source. The DoD provides a nice analogy: “Imagine if only the manufacturer of a rifle were allowed to clean, fix, modify or upgrade that rifle. The military often finds itself in this position wit taxpayer funded, contractor developed software: one contractor with a monopoly on the knowledge of a military software system and control of the software source code.” Open technology offers increased agility and flexibility, fast delivery, increased innovation, reduced risk, lower cost and information assurance and security, the DoD asserts."

Comment doublespeak (Score 1) 303

When I read this:

This move is designed to 'force heavy data users to pay more for mobile data.'

All I see is:

This move is designed to 'allow us to use bait-and-switch tactics to make a metric fuck-ton of money by screwing our customer base in ways we hope they won't notice overly much'

Maybe I'm just jaded ...

Slashdot Top Deals

It's a naive, domestic operating system without any breeding, but I think you'll be amused by its presumption.

Working...