"Discussions on the relevance of current arrangements based around reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) patent policies will be a key focus. RAND-based policies have thus far been an effective way of managing natural tensions between patent holders, standards implementers and end-users. However, the definition of what constitutes ‘reasonable’, and whether or not holders of SEPs are entitled to injunctive relief are now emerging as major points of contention. The information and communication technology (ICT) industry in particular is affected, with key protocols implemented in devices sometimes encompassing hundreds of patents. If just one patent holder decides to demand unreasonable compensation for use of its intellectual property (IP), the cost of the device in which that IP is implemented can skyrocket."
I wish them luck making progress. Many non-innovators are depending on all of that money that they're ~not really~ earning to just give it up easily.
It will be like trying to lasso a stick of butter with a red hot wire.
Dogs are great judges of character, and if your dog doesn't like somebody being around, you shouldn't trust them.
The patent litigation has become so bad that even the judges are getting pissed (see HERE)!
SPAM-posters beware! ®
For my part, I certainly hope that those «people who get even less done than those hard working civil servants we have in Washington» do manage to get something done about the disgusting circus of absurd patents and still more absurd patent litigation we are now witnessing - Judge Posner's exasperation is fully understandable (thanks for the link, Super Dave !) - coming out of (mainly, but not exclusively) the United States. The fact that the ITU has dared to refer to these patent disputes as «innovation-stifling» is encouraging ; it shows that the people involved are beginning to realise how destructive «competition by lawyer» has become....
Upvotes for everyone in this topic, since we seem unanimous in our opinion. Not even an opinion really, but a statement of fact.
As a developer, I'm actually discouraged to even try to release anything that makes enough money to put me on the radar of the patent trolls, as it would just end up costing me money in the long run. As is, It's safer for us to develop stuff inside a corporation and never have it see the light of day. I have yet to see one of these patent lawsuits where I didn't think the 'invention' (idea, really, as many of these patents aren't associated with a specific product) was completely obvious to anyone practicing in the field of design or implementation.
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
Injunctive relief for trolls with no products is a joke. So are injunctions for bogus copyrights or obvious patents. Just because some political entity say an underfunded and understaffed patent office is seeking revenge for budget cuts by approving scat, is no reason for international bodies to accept scat.
3vi1:As a developer, I'm actually discouraged to even try to release anything that makes enough money to put me on the radar of the patent trolls, as it would just end up costing me money in the long run.
That sucks. And that is why it's gonna have to change before innovation is dead.
mhenriday:as anyone who has either bolted or unbolted a door should know
I lost Pepsi through my nose when I read that,.......
I owe you one - put it on the tab !...
NEWS TIPS |
This site is intended for informational and entertainment purposes only. The contents are the views and opinion of the author and/or hisassociates. All products and trademarks are the property of their respective owners. All content and graphical elements areCopyright © 1999 - 2014 David Altavilla and HotHardware.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy and Terms