staff 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (191) comment rss

  • On the post: Could The Supreme Court Invalidate Software Patents?

    staff ( profile ), 01 Aug, 2011 @ 08:10am

    torturing

    "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries"

    Does the invention "promote the Progress of Science" and is it "useful"? If so, stop torturing yourself and the rest of us and give us some peace.

  • On the post: Intellectual Ventures' Response To This American Life: Oh Those Crazy Reporters Don't Understand Disruption

    staff ( profile ), 01 Aug, 2011 @ 08:07am

    rest

    "questionable patents"

    To you, all patents are questionable. That includes Edison's light bulb and the Wright Brothers airplane. Give it and us a rest.

    For the truth about trolls, please see http://truereform.piausa.org.

  • On the post: By Definition, A Defensive Patent Is A Bad Patent

    staff ( profile ), 01 Aug, 2011 @ 08:00am

    torturing

    "defensive patents"

    If you do not enforce your patent rights, you lose them. Surely, there must be something you can find to write about that would be more productive for you and less tortuous for the rest of us.

    According to Thomas Jefferson the right of inventors and authors to their discoveries and creations is irrefutable. To deprive one of their property which is the anchor to their livelihood is to deprive them of life itself.

    If large multinational infringer and Chinese interests don't pay you to write your rubbish, they should.

    Please see http://truereform.piausa.org/ for a different/opposing view on patent reform.
    http://docs.piausa.org/

  • On the post: Appeals Court Says Genes Are Patentable, Because They're 'Separate' From Your DNA

    staff ( profile ), 01 Aug, 2011 @ 07:47am

    torturing

    "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries"

    Does the invention "promote the Progress of Science" and is it "useful"? If so, stop torturing yourself and the rest of us and give us some peace.

  • On the post: Google Finally Speaking Up About Problems With Patent System

    staff ( profile ), 28 Jul, 2011 @ 07:38am

    rubbish

    "just how ridiculous patents had become"

    The patents of others are always "ridiculous" when you're a defendant. Take a look. Far more often large firms like Google are defendants rather than plaintiffs. It all depends as they say on whose ox is being gored as the old story goes.

    If infringers don't pay you to write this rubbish, they should.

  • On the post: Patent Troll Nathan Myhrvold Declares Patent Trolling To Be A Good Thing

    staff ( profile ), 25 Jul, 2011 @ 07:50am

    legalizing theft

    "patent troll"

    Call it what you will...patent hoarder, patent troll, non-practicing entity, etc. It all means one thing: ?we?re using your invention and we?re not going to pay?. This is just dissembling by large infringers to kill any inventor support system. It is purely about legalizing theft.

    Prior to eBay v Mercexchange, small entities had a viable chance at commercializing their inventions. If the defendant was found guilty, an injunction was most always issued. Then the inventor small entity could enjoy the exclusive use of his invention in commercializing it. Unfortunately, injunctions are often no longer available to small entity inventors because of the Supreme Court decision so we have no fair chance to compete with much larger entities who are now free to use our inventions. Worse yet, inability to commercialize means those same small entities will not be hiring new employees to roll out their products and services. And now some of those same parties who killed injunctions for small entities and thus blocked their chance at commercializing now complain that small entity inventors are not commercializing. They created the problem and now they want to blame small entities for it. What dissembling! If you don?t like this state of affairs (your unemployment is running out), tell your Congress member. Then maybe we can get some sense back in the patent system with injunctions fully enforceable on all infringers by all inventors, large and small.

    For the truth about trolls, please see http://truereform.piausa.org.

  • On the post: Lodsys Strikes Again: Sues Rovio For Patent Infringement Over Angry Birds

    staff ( profile ), 25 Jul, 2011 @ 07:40am

    bogus

    "bogus patents"

    How do you know they are bogus? Again you appear biased and baseless. Please write about something you know, if anything.

  • On the post: Debunking Some Big Myths About Patents

    staff ( profile ), 07 Jul, 2011 @ 08:50am

    invented anything?

    "Patents do not drive innovation"

    How would you know? Have either of you ever invented anything?

    Call it what you will...patent hoarder, patent troll, non-practicing entity, etc. It all means one thing: ?we?re using your invention and we?re not going to pay?. This is just dissembling by large infringers to kill any inventor support system. It is purely about legalizing theft.

    Prior to eBay v Mercexchange, small entities had a viable chance at commercializing their inventions. If the defendant was found guilty, an injunction was most always issued. Then the inventor small entity could enjoy the exclusive use of his invention in commercializing it. Unfortunately, injunctions are often no longer available to small entity inventors because of the Supreme Court decision so we have no fair chance to compete with much larger entities who are now free to use our inventions. Worse yet, inability to commercialize means those same small entities will not be hiring new employees to roll out their products and services. And now some of those same parties who killed injunctions for small entities and thus blocked their chance at commercializing now complain that small entity inventors are not commercializing. They created the problem and now they want to blame small entities for it. What dissembling! If you don?t like this state of affairs (your unemployment is running out), tell your Congress member. Then maybe we can get some sense back in the patent system with injunctions fully enforceable on all infringers by all inventors, large and small.

    For the truth about trolls, please see http://truereform.piausa.org.

  • On the post: Twitter Tries To Move Patent Trial By Saying All Twitter Users Agree To Settle Legal Disputes On Twitter's Home Turf

    staff ( profile ), 04 Jul, 2011 @ 08:57am

    freezes over

    "It's no secret that patent holders suing for infringement prefer certain venues"

    That's true, unless you'd rather wait until hell freezes over like large multinational infringers!

  • On the post: Barry Diller Tries To Explain To Ari Emanuel That He's Wrong About 'Piracy' Being A Problem For Movies

    staff ( profile ), 14 May, 2011 @ 08:10am

    fraud on America

    "more patents will quite frequently hinder, rather than help innovation"

    It is not innovation that patents hinder, but the theft of.

    Just because they call it ?reform? doesn?t mean it is. Patent reform is a fraud on America. This bill will not do what they claim it will. What it will do is help large multinational corporations maintain their monopolies by robbing and killing their small entity and startup competitors (so it will do exactly what the large multinationals paid for) and with them the jobs they would have created. According to recent studies by the Kauffman Foundation and economists at the U.S. Census Bureau, ?startups aren?t everything when it comes to job growth. They?re the only thing.? This bill is a wholesale slaughter of US jobs. Those wishing to help in the fight to defeat this bill should contact us as below.

    Small entities and inventors have been given far too little voice on this bill when one considers that they rely far more heavily on the patent system than do large firms who can control their markets by their size alone. The smaller the firm, the more they rely on patents -especially startups and individual inventors. Yet small entities create the lion's share of new jobs.

    Please see http://truereform.piausa.org/ for a different/opposing view on patent reform.
    http://docs.piausa.org/

  • On the post: Guess That Bull In Texas Was A Good Investment: EchoStar Agrees To Pay TiVo To Settle Patent Case

    staff ( profile ), 05 May, 2011 @ 07:08am

    who is Masnick working for?

    "Patent Office itself was expressing doubt "

    The PTO grants reexams for 95% of requests. Even Masnick could cobble together a request to reexam the telephone patent. Who is the PTO working for? And while at it, who is Masnick working for?

  • On the post: How One Startup Used Patents To Kill A (Better) Competitor

    staff ( profile ), 05 May, 2011 @ 07:04am

    stop dissembling

    Who says Modista had a better technology? Apparently they didnt have any patents of their own. Time and again you use psuedo logic with an agenda.

    It is not innovation that patents hinder, but the theft of.

  • On the post: Woz Completely Changes Tune On Patent Trolling From Just Months Ago

    staff ( profile ), 05 May, 2011 @ 06:58am

    restraint of trade

    Wozniak is a fat cat now. Obviously, his principal asset is Apple stock so anything that devalues Apple he is biased against. Apple and their pals have a history of restraint of trade.

    http://www.macworld.com/article/159664/2011/05/apple_google_adobe_intel_pay.html

    Call it what you will...patent hoarder, patent troll, non-practicing entity, etc. It all means one thing: ?we?re using your invention and we?re not going to pay?. This is just dissembling by large infringers to kill any inventor support system. It is purely about legalizing theft.

    Prior to eBay v Mercexchange, small entities had a viable chance at commercializing their inventions. If the defendant was found guilty, an injunction was most always issued. Then the inventor small entity could enjoy the exclusive use of his invention in commercializing it. Unfortunately, injunctions are often no longer available to small entity inventors because of the Supreme Court decision so we have no fair chance to compete with much larger entities who are now free to use our inventions. Worse yet, inability to commercialize means those same small entities will not be hiring new employees to roll out their products and services. And now some of those same parties who killed injunctions for small entities and thus blocked their chance at commercializing now complain that small entity inventors are not commercializing. They created the problem and now they want to blame small entities for it. What dissembling! If you don?t like this state of affairs (your unemployment is running out), tell your Congress member. Then maybe we can get some sense back in the patent system with injunctions fully enforceable on all infringers by all inventors, large and small.

    For the truth about trolls, please see http://truereform.piausa.org.

  • On the post: Glyn Moody's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week

    staff ( profile ), 25 Apr, 2011 @ 07:51am

    Please stop writing about patents

    It is not innovation that patents hinder, but the theft of.

    Not all competition is fair. When the courts permit a larger competitor to use an invention without the inventor's permission, it's like having a duel where your challenger has your gun and all the bullets. Think again...or just think!

    Please see http://truereform.piausa.org/ for a different/opposing view on patent reform.
    http://docs.piausa.org/

  • On the post: Jay Walker Sues Nearly Every Successful Internet Company, Claiming They're All Built Off His Patents

    staff ( profile ), 21 Apr, 2011 @ 06:37am

    truth about trolls

    "patent troll"

    Call it what you will...patent hoarder, patent troll, non-practicing entity, etc. It all means one thing: ?we?re using your invention and we?re not going to pay?. This is just dissembling by large infringers to kill any inventor support system. It is purely about legalizing theft.

    Prior to eBay v Mercexchange, small entities had a viable chance at commercializing their inventions. If the defendant was found guilty, an injunction was most always issued. Then the inventor small entity could enjoy the exclusive use of his invention in commercializing it. Unfortunately, injunctions are often no longer available to small entity inventors because of the Supreme Court decision so we have no fair chance to compete with much larger entities who are now free to use our inventions. Worse yet, inability to commercialize means those same small entities will not be hiring new employees to roll out their products and services. And now some of those same parties who killed injunctions for small entities and thus blocked their chance at commercializing now complain that small entity inventors are not commercializing. They created the problem and now they want to blame small entities for it. What dissembling! If you don?t like this state of affairs (your unemployment is running out), tell your Congress member. Then maybe we can get some sense back in the patent system with injunctions fully enforceable on all infringers by all inventors, large and small.

    For the truth about trolls, please see http://truereform.piausa.org.

  • On the post: Back In The Days When Skywriting Was Patented

    staff ( profile ), 24 Mar, 2011 @ 08:49am

    on notice

    It puts infringers on notice which is required. Please leave these matters to those who understand it.

  • On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

    staff ( profile ), 21 Mar, 2011 @ 08:00am

    US Const

    from the US Const, Section 8-

    "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries"

    What more does one need to say.

  • On the post: No Surprise: Senate Approves Useless Patent Reform

    staff ( profile ), 10 Mar, 2011 @ 07:03am

    fraud

    Just because they call it ?reform? doesn?t mean it is. Patent reform is a fraud on America. This bill will not do what they claim it will. What it will do is help large corporations maintain their monopolies and kill their small entity and startup competitors (which is exactly what they intended it to do) and with them the jobs they would have created. According to recent studies by the Kauffman Foundation and economists at the U.S. Census Bureau, ?startups aren?t everything when it comes to job growth. They?re the only thing.? This bill is a wholesale slaughter of US jobs. America.

    Please see http://truereform.piausa.org/ for a different/opposing view on patent reform.
    http://docs.piausa.org/2011PatentReform/

  • On the post: Next Tech Area To Be Hindered By Patents: Nanotech… And Much Of It Is Funded With Your Tax Dollars

    staff ( profile ), 18 Feb, 2011 @ 06:49am

    theft of

    "innovation hindering patent thicket "

    As any truly innovative small entity will tell you, patents don't hinder innovation, but rather the theft of. At least they did when we could enforce them.

    Please see http://truereform.piausa.org/ for an inventor?s perspective on patent reform.

  • On the post: Chinese Researcher Points Out How Patents Can Hinder Innovation

    staff ( profile ), 18 Feb, 2011 @ 06:43am

    lost in the translation

    "Chinese Researcher Points Out How Patents Can Hinder Innovation"

    Something got lost in the translation. What they meant was patents can hinder "theft of" innovation.

Next >>