[Nottingham] Google Gets Umbrella Patent For Cloud Operating Systems
jasonirwin73 at gmail.com
Tue Sep 4 07:53:49 UTC 2012
On 03/09/12 16:59, Martin wrote:
> Is this for real?!...
Yes, and there is quite a bit of contention about it. I have not read
the specific patent and don't know if the USPTO has dropped a clanger
(again) or if there is something truly innovative in here (it was filed
in 2009). This, of course, ignores any arguments about software patents
> "...the tone of the patent is much more than that. Google may have, in
> fact, received a patent that covers client cloud operating systems in
> general. ..."
I would have thought that enough prior art would exist. After all,
given a decent WiFi network, and various proxies/gateways; would
something running X not have qualified as a "cloud OS". Then there is
Cloud OS really just a dumb terminal, or some kind of dynamic-scaling
madness? Dunno (yet).
> Or is that another money-making ploy by the patents office and lawyers
> in league with them to make money over all the ensuing arguments?
I think it's arse-corvering given the USA patent system. Love or loathe
it, it exists and you'd be a fool to not take precautionary measures.
Or maybe this sweeping patent is going to be part of a Goog push for
reform? Not that I really credit Google with that much public spirit.
> After all, if a certain company could patent use of the
> rectangle-with-slightly-rounded-corners, who knows?...
Patenting a shape is not that usual. Coca-Cola bottles were patented,
for example (trademark would not be good enough because it would only
apply to fizzy-pop and the shape identified the company, and copyright
really doesn't do it either) and it's fairly common practice to try and
combat passing-off. Where the problem arises is when a shape/thing get
a patent when there is only one answer (or a very small number). From
my understanding, in these cases the patent office is meant to tell you
to bugger off.
More information about the Nottingham