microsoft gets patent on double clicks and long click

[Doom9]

Yet another example on how bad the US patent system actually is:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,727,830.WKU.&OS=PN/6,727,830&RS=PN/6,727,830

What happened to prior art? This thing was filed in 2002.. I know I've used double clicks and long clicks before that. I'm not 100% certain anymore (my lectures on patent law are not that fresh in my memory), but I thought you had to at least file for the patent before you release the technology, or you forfeit your innovation. Plus, Windows wasn't really the first GUI to use double clicks, which means we have prior art by other companies, and that most certainly is a killing factor.

[sysKin]

I think the reasoning is "of course, but you need more lawyers than we have".

[SeeMoreDigital]

What a load of crap, M$ have got a bloody cheek. They'll be wanting to patient the word patient next.

OK then, they've got a US patient. I doubt (hope) they don't get a 'world-wide' patent

And remember... two blinks means yes. And one means no ;)


Cheers

[communist]

Originally posted by Doom9
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,727,830.WKU.&OS=PN/6,727,830&RS=PN/6,727,830

Heard that before and in connection with PDAs etc... ->on a limited resource computing device
Oh M$ - now you have also declared war on sanity :devil:

[stephanV]

i just checked my calendar if it was the 1st of april... but it wasn't... :(

[Wilbert]

Well, when we usually say 1st of April, I guess Microsoft says 3rd of June :eek:

[mudda_t]

Double click and long click this (http://www.fuckbillgates.com/) Bill!
.
.
Does this mean I can finally patent single clicks?

[sysKin]

New Scientist has an interesting article (http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99995072). Nothing really new, but this might explain some things:
US Patent Office spokesperson Brigid Quinn says: "[...]If someone can submit prior art, we will re-examine the patent." Such a submission would cost between $3000 and $8000.
"Lots of bad patents never get revoked because no one can afford the litigation to refute them"
"You would be a brave company to take on Microsoft."

[Doom9]

Lots of bad patents never get revoked because no one can afford the litigation to refute themThat's the major problem with patent law these days. The law assumes every submission is valid, and patent offices only perfom a casual check if the content of the application is patent worthy. Due to budget restrictions, that check has become highly unsatisfying. Patent offices need a budget hike of several hundred if not thousand percents to keep up with patent applications and hire the proper experts to examine a patent application. Since they don't have those funds, trivial patents like this are granted.

And companies affected, unless they're big and ugly like M$, often have no option to cough up the money as patent ligitations can take years and eat up a lot of money. Legislators should simplify the patent revokation process to something that any company can affort (thus submit an application, pay a small fee (patent applications are cheap.. so the inverse should be, too), and get the patent re-examined).

[Neo Neko]

In this the information age why not open it up to the public? Set up some way that a person could register online and present prior art claims for the pattent office to investigate. Every time something like this comes up there are hundreds of outraged Slashdotters. Why not give them a way to input and contribute. That or make slashdot manditory reading among other sites for the drones at the pattent office.

[Doom9]

I think people working at the patent office would be severely intellectually challenged to read slashdot ;)

I just found this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3722509.stm

Let's hope the FTC has their way.. at least that would bring some improvement. There has to be some easy recourse possibilities, but I think it should still cost something.. otherwise everybody can challenge a competitor's patent even though there's no grounds for a challenge.. and that would again tie up the people working at the patent office.

[Doobie]

Assume that you have the money and motivation to challenge the M$ double-click patent -- Why do you have the motivation? Because you're a smaller software company that uses double-clicks in your software. -- When you start to challenge the patent, an M$ lawyer will show up at your door and point out a dozen M$ patents that M$ will claim you're violating if you go through with your challenge.

So, now you're $3000 to $8000 challenge becomes a million-dollar challenge if you want to fight M$ on a number of patents or just pay a few thousand bucks for the right to use the double-click patent.

Patents are the currency of big business to keep away small competitors. That would be fine if most patents weren't trival.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by Doom9
I think people working at the patent office would be severely intellectually challenged to read slashdot ;)

At this point I could hardly see how it would hurt. If they are going to be governing pattents in this sort of field they should at least learn to speak the lingo and mingle with the effected masses.

[bond]

there are elections in the US soon: vote for someone who will not simply continue this fud

[virus]

Originally posted by bond
there are elections in the US soon: vote for someone who will not simply continue this fud I don't think there is such a president in the horizon... :devil:
I've seen the power switching from (centre-)left to (centre-)right lot of times in my country and nothing ever changed. Trust me, the big industry licks lotta asses on every party. There are two clear-cut examples in Italy right now, and I don't think things are that different in the USA. (btw which president signed the DMCA? ;))
I fear you really cannot fight them :(

[Neo Neko]

Yeah unfortunatly our choices this year are going to be Bush or Bush lite. And no I am not talking beer. Though we might get more done if we just sat drinking beer. :p It has come to the point that in america that only the ritch and connected can win public office. The notion that the average person can win a public election is an outdated concept in moddern society. It would take a truly great catyclism or uprising to buck the system. Money serves money. So unless you have money the government is not going to serve you right. I would like to think that the government would take care of things in the USPTO. But the situation in the USPTO has arisen because of those with money and serves those with money so I don't see it changing any time soon.

[bond]

I don't think there is such a president in the horizon... :devil:
I've seen the power switching from (centre-)left to (centre-)right lot of times in my country and nothing ever changed.
Yeah unfortunatly our choices this year are going to be Bush or Bush lite.
The notion that the average person can win a public election is an outdated concept in moddern society.well, altough i am not american, i still know that there are not only two persons running for president.
what about nader?

yeah, i know many people always say voting for none of established parties is a lost vote, but in fact exactly these opinions are hurting the alternatives and strengthening the established politics
simply look at europe: in europe many parties got very important over the years with more and more people voting for them (greens, liberals...) and now are also sitting in the governments, ruling countries! (like in germany, where the greens are forming a government together with the socialdemocrats. yeah, the greens! these "we love trees" people :D )

why shouldnt this be possible in the US?
talk is cheap, kick their asses with not voting for them, but for the alternative ;)


edit: bond laughs at "look at europe" :D

[eb]

As we saw from the last cases that tanks and similiar pancer devices are useless in the real war, but all this stuff can be very handy to fight music piracy.

eb

[virus]

Originally posted by Neo Neko
Money serves money. So unless you have money the government is not going to serve you right.
True. Nowadays this is simply a standard strategy for a big company. A politician's lifespan as a president cannot be longer than 8 years, while a big company lasts much more...
So what to do? You cannot commit yourself to a single party, otherwise you'll fall down when they fall down (just at the next election, maybe). You need to defend your market share everyday. So you try to be "balanced" and get "friends" in both sides, and in this way you're prepared to deal with a new presidency already. Of course, a bunch of $$$ helps friendship a lot ;) :devil:

Again, I'm not blaming USA in particular, in my view this is a problem in every industrialized country out there (including mine). And breaking that system is a damn difficult thing... maybe even impossible :(

virus

[Doom9]

guys, need I remind you that we have a forum rule that says 15) Political discussion not directly related to DVD backup issues are prohibited.The US elections are most certainly covered by this rule.