Sometimes people focus too much on trying to get funding instead of innovating. If your technology is not impressive enough to get funding maybe the approach is wrong? Either not enough information to get the funding is provided or for some or other reason the funders feel its not what they want to fund. I am trying to understand the dynamics as I am in a similar situation with regards to funding a product.
By you saying that, it means cars should never have any new technology or new innovations in them because we have cars already? So because all the things you mentioned above have been around a while and even if there is a new innovation, its not innovative? Wow
I'm disagreeing with that, but hey. I am not going to put a case forward with that type of thought pattern, its just going to waste my time.
Google's also making advances/innovating in areas of data storage, indexing etc. And I am sure, there are hardware and network advances too. Ever thought about how they cope with all the info that's on their servers? Their innovations are not purely advertising. All this just happens in the background thats all.
So using the 6 degrees of separation principle, somewhere you know a criminal and possible a very bad one at that, or even worse... a copyright thieving pirate down loader. I suggest you immediately turn yourself in and claim responsibility. Oh and pay a couple of million rand in compensation. That should make it right.
I thought math formulas and algorithms is not patent-able. And reading the patents it seems like, along with the algorithm, this patent is making use of decision making process. This process would then be a business process which is also not patent-able. Could someone please explain and correct me if I am wrong.
"Next year Apple will come out with the same product. Just like Microsoft they got big by stealing from the little guy who couldn't defend themselves legally. Apple SUCKS! Microsoft SUCKS just a little less. Go Android! Screw these controlling freaks. Put them out of business, don't buy their crap. Android powers better quality equipment anyway."
yea, until Google changes the Android terms. Never say never. I have been in this industry long enough to see free things go paid or become restrictive. So I choose to be happy with whats available now but knows it will not last forever. Then I just move on to the next flavor of the month.
really... I think this is good time now to take gun manufacturers to court. They certainly know that some of their guns are used for illegal purposes. Lets face it, its all their fault people die due to gunshot wounds.
Really? I think his points are still valid. Why do I have to jump through hoops to get them to take my money. Its nice within the US bubble, not so nice outside, especially if you are in an insignificant country. But alas. I have to admit that I am finding very good indie people to support lately which I might not otherwise have looked for. Indie people 1. Archaic content creators 0
I agree with your statement.. but I dont feel that is enough. I study part time and work during the day, so its impossible to me to access any published information I require from the library (which is only open during working hours). It is also not available via the university website because of publisher constraints. In all my courses sofar we havent made use of any information behind behind a paywall either. And I think, especially for anything in the IT industry, to not be in the open relegates you to obscurity. Not that these people get it. We are suppose to be building on information, not reinventing the wheel. I can understand if you have to recoup costs in digitizing info, but then charge a nominal fee until such time the costs incurred is paid off. Why dont they have something like the safari books online model for the papers then (its not perfect, but its a start)?
In the meantime I bypass any paywalled papers and only reference whats freely available, becuase Im certainly not going to pay 20$ for a 100 papers to find the ones I am really after.
I have to wonder about the descrepancy between the different patent systems though. With the US wanting to enforce their patents on anyone, what would happen if its a company that are not allowed to patent software in their respective country but are getting sued by some chancer that patented it in the US? Now the company could patent in the US, but if you are a small business and you actually just service your local community and maybe the odd US visitor, what do you do? Patenting in the US can be very expensive if you start converting it from certain currencies. So you either take the risk or just pay. And with the US just shutting down domains and wanting to extradite people even though their home country says its legal does not leave one with a warm fuzzy feeling. After all some chancer with pockets of money could wipe out a small business with no recourse for that small business.
I am not going to get into the pirate debate right now. What I want to know is where will all this stop? People jump on the pirate bandwagon now. But what if the pirates are gone. What if all this is used to stifle free speech in future ie. We dont like sites by people of a certain race/color/religeous/political view etc? And with no way to question or protect myself? I am not an american citizen but have a .com domain, so what will my options be if it gets taken down? Only throwing lots of money at the problem which I dont have? Registering another domain? But then if everything is controlled by the US, whats the point?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Sonja.