DISQUS

Hello! The Technology Liberation Front is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.

Community Page

techliberation.com/ Jump to website »

Subscribe
- New Comments
Community
Top Commenters
- eee_eff
  781 comments · 5 points
- Richard Bennett
  604 comments · 1 points
- Steve R.
  461 comments · 20 points
- Jim Harper
  261 comments · 1 points
- Adam Thierer
  180 comments · 0 points
Popular Threads
- Defending Free
  5 日 ago · 12 comments
- “Free” Isn’t Worth Reading, But It’s Worth Discussing
  5 日 ago · 10 comments
- Ad-Supported Internet: The Musical (Web Side Story)
  5 日 ago · 7 comments
- Gov Schwarzenegger Terminates Nexus Tax, Overstock Going Back to Cali
  3 日 ago · 3 comments
- Don’t Believe ‘Special Access’ Hype
  1 週間 ago · 12 comments
Recent Comments
- I totally agree with you that we all need to put down our pens (or rather our keyboards for this matter), and understand that we are doing great harm to those journalists, institutions, or other...
  2 時間 ago by chiropractic training
  
  in Book Review: Lee Siegel’s Against the Machine
- Your issue as I understand it is with Level 3 - are they an ILEC? Isn't Qwest (or a local coop) the ILEC there in Laramie? Two - you provide services a lot like a local exchange - I would guess...
  8 時間 ago by mwendy
  
  in Don’t Believe ‘Special Access’ Hype
- Yes, I will agree that you are not "getting me." First of all, I do not buy unbundled network elements (UNEs), nor am I a CLEC. I am a wireless ISP -- a true last mile provider and an...
  13 時間 ago by Brett Glass
  
  in Don’t Believe ‘Special Access’ Hype
- <i>I'd buy a newspaper that reported substance over he said/she said stenography mixed with tabloid fluff.</i> You might, but I think most of the evidence suggests that not very...
  2 日 ago by Tim Lee
  
  in False Dichotomies and the Death of Print
- This is too funny!
  2 日 ago by mark
  
  in A Social Hack on Gmail Users

The Technology Liberation Front

The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.

Jump to original thread »

Announcing Software Patent of the Week

Started by TLF · 10 ヶ月 ago

8 comments

lippard
3 年 ago

The Electronic Frontier Foundation's Patent-Busting Project is a good resource.

The one that has recently got my attention is C2 Global (formerly Acceris's) VOIP patent, as per this very recent lawsuit filing.

lippard
3 年 ago

Kevin Carson's blog has an interesting post about non-software patents stifling innovation. Key quote:

The fuel efficiency of steam engines is not thought to have changed at all during the period of Watt's patent; while between 1810 and 1835 it is estimated to have increased by a factor of five. After the expiration of Watt's patents in 1800, not only was there an explosion in the production of engines, but steam power finally came into its own as the driving force of the industrial revolution. In the next 30 years steam engines were modified and improved, and such crucial innovations as the steam train, the steamboat and the steam jenny all came into wide usage. The key innovation was the high-pressure steam engine -- development of which had been blocked by Watt by strategically using his 1775 patent.

Tim
3 年 ago

Interesting. I've corresponded with Levine and I think his arguments are provocative, if not always persuasive.

The merits of patents in general is an issue I just don't feel qualified to have a definite opinion on. I think that software patents have several characteristics that make them especially bad, so I'd rather focus on highlighting those flaws and leave the broader issue of patent reform to others who know the issue better than me.

Paul Leopardi
3 年 ago

One patent you may want to look at is United States Patent 6,859,816 Makino, et al.
February 22, 2005, (assignee: Sony Corporation), filed January 25, 2001. This
seems to be a patent for a case of the Fast Fourier Transform. It looks to me to be
invalid on the grounds of one or more of: (a) patent describes a pure algorithm, not an artifact or technical mechanism, or (b) prior art, eg. FFTW, or (c) obviousness. See, eg. FFTW release notes for possible prior art.