Hadron <hadronquark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Andrew Halliwell <spike1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> Hadron <hadronquark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Patents encourage innovation you blithering idiot. It safeguards your
>>> hard work and innovation from scurrilous freeloaders and copycats like
>>> you.
>>>
>>
>> SOME patents
>> Not patents in general
>> The patent system is in the shitter at the moment because of software
>> patents. Something that should NEVER have existed.
>
> I appreciate you might not have ever worked on any R&D in SW, but tell
> me how you would feel if you spent 3 years with a 20 strong team
> creating some new algorithms/processes only to have your competitor copy
> them to their benefit and to your demise?
>
It would be easier to hire a twenty-strong team to work for three
years devising convoluted language to describe otherwise blatantly
obvious processes, so that my company could hoodwink naive patent
examiners into overlooking prior art, thereby allowing us to accumulate
a software-patent portfolio that guarantees that we occupy the highest
ground on the playing field.
> Do wake up and smell the roses.
Excellent. That is straight from Section T. of our latest patent
application where we describe the innovative olfactory process
it incorporates:
(
) /
( ( (##)---._ _
) b "' `-----
_ _ _ \ ( 88_
`-----(##) ___888b__
"' _d888888888b (
( ___d888888888888_ )
) d88888888888888888b (
( d8888888888888888888__
___8888888888888888888888b
d88888888888888888888888888b
888888888888888888888888888P
Y8888Zot888888888888888888P
Prior art? What prior art?
Oh, you mean this:
http://www.asciiartfarts.com/20031206.html
|
|
