Reward for Destroying Software Patent: Richard Stallman(stallman.org)
stallman.org
Reward for Destroying Software Patent: Richard Stallman
http://stallman.org/archives/2011-mar-jun.html#5_June_2011_(Reward_for_Destroying_Software_Patent)
4 comments
Original article at the Guardian - http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/appsblog/2011/jun/03/ap...
Was I the only one who thought that Richard Stallman is the prize for destroying software patents? As much as I dislike patents, I wouldn't know what to do with a full-size Stallman at home.
Title seems inaccurate. Bounty is being offered by Article One Partners. It was merely linked to by Stallman.
This totally reminds me of a recent incident where someone suggested me to file for patents just because I am not getting success with the products/business I am building/trying to build. I did not get the point!
However I have to admit that I find it difficult to totally deny the existence of patents when I think about it from a specific angle such as "stackoverflow vs scrapers". What if stackoverflow had filed for a patent years back!!
EDIT: oh yes I am aware that content protection is a copyright issue and has nothing to do with patent. And thats why I said "thinking from a specific angle"; which means that it is not the exact analogy, it's just a picture how it might happen in the patent ground. And I am not trying to defend SW patents because they do not make sense, I am just bringing up the point that due credit should be given to original author and if he wants to patent it, it should be respected.
However I have to admit that I find it difficult to totally deny the existence of patents when I think about it from a specific angle such as "stackoverflow vs scrapers". What if stackoverflow had filed for a patent years back!!
EDIT: oh yes I am aware that content protection is a copyright issue and has nothing to do with patent. And thats why I said "thinking from a specific angle"; which means that it is not the exact analogy, it's just a picture how it might happen in the patent ground. And I am not trying to defend SW patents because they do not make sense, I am just bringing up the point that due credit should be given to original author and if he wants to patent it, it should be respected.
A patent for what? And how useful would it be anyway? The scrappers steal the content, and all the content is user generated.
>content is user generated
This is the biggest excuse. Thats how everyone escapes, isn't it? Even funnyjunk does that with oatmeal and claims that it's user generated content http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/06/funnyjunk-vs...
This is the biggest excuse. Thats how everyone escapes, isn't it? Even funnyjunk does that with oatmeal and claims that it's user generated content http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/06/funnyjunk-vs...
You are aware that content ownership is a copyright issue, and has nothing to do with patent law, right?