Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #66518

Re: Patents, was [Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing, was [Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads]]

Show all headers | View raw

On 29.07.2015 03:53, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> On 28-Jul-15 04:41, Morten W. Petersen wrote:
[...]
>> Realistically though, it looks like at some level this is a game
>> that big companies play, and that it is very unlikely that big
>> companies will go after "the little guy".
>
> The software industry has collectively agreed that the very idea of
> software patents is bogus and uses them mainly for defensive purposes.
> Cross-licensing agreements are common, even if one side has hundreds or
> even thousands of patents and the other (currently) has zero.  Actual
> lawsuits between vendors are extremely rare.

Lawsuits are one thing.  Hints about lawsuits and other techniques to
"negotiate" are another.

It seems fair that a person or an organization that puts a lot of time
and effort into creating something new, should be rewarded for it.

However, it looks to me like it is hard to discern what can be called
"patent land-grabbing" and what is genuinely new ground.

>> I'm more worried about various lesser known companies that can work
>> on big company agendas or even other people's personal agendas
>> without it being obvious.  Or people that have found a rather dubious
>> way of making money.
>
> The problem is "patent trolls" who buy up patents (mostly from defunct
> companies), sit on them for years while software vendors unknowingly
> violate those patents, and then pop up and sue everyone.  Since they
> make nothing themselves, there is no cross-licensing and no way for the
> victims to countersue.
>
> Many companies will just pay trolls to go away because it's cheaper than
> beating them in court--and that's what they're counting on.  The major
> vendors will often take them to court, even though it costs them more in
> the short run, as a matter of principle--and to rack up precedents in
> their favor for the long run.

Well, from a political standpoint, it would seem the main reason
patents exist is that they should foster innovation and inventions.

That they can be abused is like many other things in life, I guess
if it becomes a big enough problem the system will be changed to
deal with it.

-Morten

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 20:50 +0200
  Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-28 00:22 +0100
    Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing, was [Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads] Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-27 21:00 -0400
      Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing, was [Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state,   threads] Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-28 13:57 +1200
        Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing, was [Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state,   threads] Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-27 22:13 -0400
          Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing, was [Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state,     threads] Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-28 17:12 +1200
            Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-28 09:46 -0400
          Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing, was [Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads] "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 10:07 +0200
            Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing, was [Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads] raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-28 09:28 +0000
              Patents, was [Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing, was [Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads]] "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 11:41 +0200
                Re: Patents, was [Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing, was [Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads]] Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-07-28 20:53 -0500
                Re: Patents, was [Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing, was [Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads]] "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-29 05:15 +0200
                Re: Patents, was [Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing, was [Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads]] Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2015-07-28 22:34 -0600
      Re: OT - XML Parallel Parsing, was [Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-28 03:06 +0100
    Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 10:44 +0200
      Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-28 22:14 +1200
        Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 15:17 +0200
      Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-28 08:35 -0400
      Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-28 10:29 -0400
        Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 16:39 +0200
  Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads jadill33@gmail.com - 2015-07-28 06:47 -0700
    Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 16:56 +0200
      Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-07-28 18:04 +0200
      Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads jadill33@gmail.com - 2015-07-28 10:53 -0700
        Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-29 04:59 +0200
  Re: setjmp, longjmp, parser state, threads Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-28 16:29 +0100

csiph-web