[sclug] sclug Digest, Vol 106, Issue 2

[Neil Haughton]

Hey, I wasn't trashing all lawyers! Just relating the advice that lawyers
who work in the field had given, and the sentiment (theirs) that most
software patents are just kite flying, with my observation that there is a
clear vested interest in that given that it benefits themselves mostly if
it comes to court, at the expense of consumers (who eventually indirectly
pay the fees)

Actually, given that there is hundreds of years' worth of clear prior art
for a slide-operated lock, and clear prior art for the software abstraction
of physical objects to enhance an HCI (scrollbars, windows, buttons etc
etc), I wonder how the simple and obvious combination of those two things
can possibly be patented?

But then I was also advised that in court these things don't usually hinge
on common or practical sense, but much more on legal niceties, fine
debating points. Depressing, really.

Neil

On 7 July 2012 13:00, <sclug-request at sclug.org.uk> wrote:

> Send sclug mailing list submissions to
>         sclug at sclug.org.uk
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://sclug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/sclug
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         sclug-request at sclug.org.uk
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         sclug-owner at sclug.org.uk
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of sclug digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: sclug Digest, Vol 106, Issue 1 (Neil Haughton)
>    2. Re: sclug Digest, Vol 106, Issue 1 (Neil Brown)
>    3. Re: sclug Digest, Vol 106, Issue 1 (Keith Edmunds)
>    4. Re: sclug Digest, Vol 106, Issue 1 (Neil Brown)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Neil Haughton <haughtonomous at googlemail.com>
> To: sclug at sclug.org.uk
> Cc:
> Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2012 09:42:14 +0100
> Subject: Re: [sclug] sclug Digest, Vol 106, Issue 1
> The trouble is software patent suits are not about common sense and
> protecting an inventor's right to prosper from his/her's ideas, they are
> about keeping corporate lawyers in the manner to which they have become
> accustomed.
> I have been looking into the question at work and the legal advice we has
> had is that in Europe at least patenting software securely is very
> difficult except in very narrow circumstances. Most such patents are
> dubious and there to continue the gravy train at the expense of consumers.
> And that from a lawyer!
> I bet that if patent attorneys had to return their fees whenever a patent
> they had contrived was successfully challenged, there would be a lot fewer
> of them (both)!
>
> Neil
> (from my mobile phone)
> On Jul 6, 2012 1:00 PM, <sclug-request at sclug.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > Send sclug mailing list submissions to
> >         sclug at sclug.org.uk
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >         http://sclug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/sclug
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >         sclug-request at sclug.org.uk
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> >         sclug-owner at sclug.org.uk
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of sclug digest..."
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> >    1. slide to unlock (Graham Swallow)
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Graham Swallow <lists at information-cascade.co.uk>
> > To: sclug at sclug.org.uk
> > Cc:
> > Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 14:12:29 +0100
> > Subject: [sclug] slide to unlock
> > HELP! I am stuck in the garden!
> >
> > Some guy from patent enforcement came round, welded my garden gate bolt
> > shut,
> > muttering something about people like me using pirated technology.
> > I tried all the gestures I could think of, but that probably made it
> worse.
> >
> > I tried arguing that their patent had prior art from
> > barn-door-wooden-claves,
> > but they claim that residential-use-metal-bolts is a unique
> specialisation.
> >
> > Its started to rain. Again.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > sclug mailing list
> > sclug at sclug.org.uk
> > http://sclug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/sclug
> >
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Neil Brown <neil at neilzone.co.uk>
> To: haughtonomous at googlemail.com
> Cc: sclug at sclug.org.uk
> Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2012 10:19:08 +0100
> Subject: Re: [sclug] sclug Digest, Vol 106, Issue 1
>
> On 7 Jul 2012, at 09:42, Neil Haughton wrote:
>
> > Most such patents are
> > dubious and there to continue the gravy train at the expense of
> consumers.
> > And that from a lawyer!
>
> Presumably a lawyer looking to keep him/herself in the manner to which
> he/she has become accustomed?
>
>
> Neil
>
> __________
>
> Neil Brown
> neil at neilzone.co.uk | http://neilzone.co.uk
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Keith Edmunds <kae at midnighthax.com>
> To: sclug at sclug.org.uk
> Cc:
> Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2012 10:29:34 +0100
> Subject: Re: [sclug] sclug Digest, Vol 106, Issue 1
> On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 10:19:08 +0100, neil at neilzone.co.uk said:
>
> > > Most such patents are
> > > dubious and there to continue the gravy train at the expense of
> > > consumers. And that from a lawyer!
> >
> > Presumably a lawyer looking to keep him/herself in the manner to which
> > he/she has become accustomed?
>
> Isn't that exactly what Neil Haughton said (in his top-posted comment):
>
> > ...they are
> > about keeping corporate lawyers in the manner to which they have become
> > accustomed.
> --
> We're looking for good Linux people:
> http://www.tiger-computing.co.uk/jobs
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Neil Brown <neil at neilzone.co.uk>
> To: Keith Edmunds <kae at midnighthax.com>
> Cc: "sclug at sclug.org.uk" <sclug at sclug.org.uk>
> Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2012 10:45:39 +0100
> Subject: Re: [sclug] sclug Digest, Vol 106, Issue 1
>
> On 7 Jul 2012, at 10:29, Keith Edmunds <kae at midnighthax.com> wrote:
>
> > Isn't that exactly what Neil Haughton said
>
> In terms of those nasty first paragraph corporate lawyers, yes. My feeling
> was that the sentiment did not apply to the friendly middle paragraph
> lawyer (who seemed I have been instructed to advise his/her client on
> patent ability of software).
>
> I could be wrong - it could just be the (not unusual) feeling that all
> lawyers are evil, and are the source of blame for anything which commercial
> organisations might do which displeases someone. (Something which, as a
> lawyer, you learn to ignore quite quickly!)
>
>
> Neil
>
> -----
> neil at neilzone.co.uk | http://neilzone.co.uk
>
> _______________________________________________
> sclug mailing list
> sclug at sclug.org.uk
> http://sclug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/sclug
>