Too Much Free Time

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
dilbert, patents



Dilbert Takes On Overbearing Patents

from the but-confuses-trademark-law dept

It didn't take very long for a whole bunch of you to submit today's Dilbert, where Scott Adams (finally) goes after overly broad patents, with Dilbert announcing that it makes no sense to build things any more, since "all future ideas are already covered by over-general patents":
Dilbert.com
Though, to be fair, Adams seems to confuse patents and trademarks in the second panel (editors?). Still, nice to see Dilbert taking on such an issue.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 9 Sep 2009 @ 10:24am

    They're not incompatible

    The REAL action is in Trademark Infringement. That's where you can stop people from even talking about you. At least, people with fewer lawyers and/or resources.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Sep 2009 @ 10:52am

      Re: They're not incompatible

      Especially when one considers that section 230 immunities don't extend to service providers, lots of money for trolls.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    AW, 9 Sep 2009 @ 10:33am

    No Taco for you

    ChurchHatesTucker - Yeah, but why won't Glenn Beck deny he raped and murdered a young girl in 1990?

    Everyone else - I love Dilbert. I am glad so many other readers do too.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Kilgore Trout, 9 Sep 2009 @ 11:18am

      Re: No Taco for you

      LOLWUT?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Dark Helmet (profile), 9 Sep 2009 @ 11:41am

        Re: Re: No Taco for you

        Did I miss some kind of Glenn Beck rapist discussion while I was battling Swine Flu?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Shawn (profile), 9 Sep 2009 @ 11:48am

          Re: Re: Re: No Taco for you

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 9 Sep 2009 @ 12:00pm

          Re: Re: Re: No Taco for you

          "Did I miss some kind of Glenn Beck rapist discussion while I was battling Swine Flu?"

          So you also cannot deny Beck's rape and murder of a young girl in 1990?

          Interesting...

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Enrico Suarve, 10 Sep 2009 @ 2:41am

          Re: Re: Re: No Taco for you

          Hang on, people who are accusing Glenn Beck of raping a young black girl in 1990 are now suddenly contracting swine flu?

          Are there any lengths he won't go to in order to cover up the fact that he still won't deny not having raped a woman?

          Sick bastard (not you, Glenn). I mean that Glenn is sick obviously for not denying that he is giving out swine flu to people exposing his covering up his not denying raping a girl not you for having it, although you obviously are or were sick, but in a different way, unless Glenn also has swine flu after exposing himself in which case you're both sick in the same way...partially

          Some people say that Glenn is not doing enough to protect the children, and now I understand why. It must be because he's too busy raping them or infecting those kids who spot that he hasn't said that he isn't in fact Glenn Beck an alleged child rapist but someone else instead

          I can't believe this is allowed to go on - I'm shocked, this is too much...[sobs]...won't somebody think of the anchors? No? [blows nose]...this isn't the America I love...Oh yeah I'm English, anyway...[cries]...devastated

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Avatar28 (profile), 9 Sep 2009 @ 1:00pm

    I doubt Adams was confused

    Adams was an engineer, I really doubt he was confused about the difference. Notice how Dilbert said they should get out of their current business. CHW has it right, Trademark seems to be what everybody is trying to ab-use these days.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    NullOp, 9 Sep 2009 @ 1:20pm

    Dilbert

    Like I've said so often before, Dilbert is a documentary not a comic strip.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    spaceman spiff, 9 Sep 2009 @ 2:03pm

    patents vs. trademarks

    I think this was a deliberate "mistake". How else could Dilbert take down both patent and trademark trolls in only 3 panels? :-)

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Sep 2009 @ 2:25pm

    Reasonable reverse royalty

    What about a reverse royalty for busting an overbroad patent. You could recover legal fees in reverse infringement by people who would have infringed by are now free and clear.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    lux (profile), 9 Sep 2009 @ 3:43pm

    To be fair?

    "Though, to be fair, Adams seems to confuse patents and trademarks in the second panel (editors?). Still, nice to see Dilbert taking on such an issue."

    It's a cartoon?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    ethorad, 10 Sep 2009 @ 5:02am

    seems familier

    The only winning move is not to play?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Sep 2009 @ 6:44pm

    It makes sense to me. Making products is risky: what if patent reform fails? Patent litigation is risky: what if patent reform succeeds? OTOH, trademark litigation is on a steady upward curve.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    sprearson81 (profile), 9 Jun 2012 @ 6:37am

    Gotta love a bit of Dilbert!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Reality bites, 14 Sep 2014 @ 10:01am

    Wouldn't it be cheaper to just imprison the lawyers?

    Since only one out of 1,000,000 is human anyway.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Caution: Copyright
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.