software patents => sane or insane?

uncloned · July 30, 2009, 08:07:31

Quote"VoloMedia announced today that it has been awarded what it called the 'patent for podcasting.' According to the press announcement, patent number 7,568,213, titled 'Method for Providing Episodic Media,' covers: '...the fundamental mechanisms of podcasting, including providing consumer subscription to a show, automatically downloading media to a computer, prioritizing downloads, providing users with status indication, deleting episodes, and synchronizing episodes to a portable media device.'"

http://newteevee.com/2009/07/29/volomedia-awarded-the-patent-for-podcasting/

Louigi Verona · July 30, 2009, 08:32:36

The danger of software patents:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YewER5da0SA

(stallman actually starts in from the second part here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oska4LQRRb8
)

uncloned · July 30, 2009, 21:34:43

Quote
"Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister suggests that Wolfram Research's claim to copyright of results returned by the Wolfram Alpha engine could have significant ramifications for the software industry. 'While software companies routinely retain sole ownership of their software and license it to users, Wolfram Research has taken the additional step of claiming ownership of the output of the software itself,' McAllister writes, pointing out that it is 'at least theoretically possible to copyright works generated by machines.' And, under current copyright law, if any Wolfram claim to authorship of the output of its engine is upheld, by extension the same rules will apply to other information services in similar cases as well. In other words, 'If unique presentations based on software-based manipulation of mundane data are copyrightable, who retains what rights to the resulting works?'"

http://infoworld.com/d/developer-world/how-wolfram-alpha-could-change-software-248

Now.... this is an interesting question because....

If I take openmpt and load it with samples and take advantage of every randomize function with a random series of notes I could go the the copyright office and get a copyright on the output of OpenMPT which I'd call a song.

How is that different from the above database search?

However I object to copyrighting the search results - many fewer people question (unlike most of us) the idea of copyrighting a song or a novel, etc.

Sam_Zen · July 30, 2009, 23:07:46

The dicussion about software patents started on the TC forum in 2003 and went upto 2007 :
http://www.ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=1568

maleek · July 31, 2009, 08:15:25

That is crazy Uncloned. I might just as well retain the rights to what people write on their scetchpads because I manufacture the pads in question. This is so stupid I am dumbfounded.

Saga Musix · July 31, 2009, 10:51:13

Hey, that actually happens in the real world. Have you ever used ICQ? Or read their terms of service? They hold the copyright no everything you write on ICQ, on every file you transfer via ICQ. It's just sick, and still, millions are using it.

Louigi Verona · July 31, 2009, 14:40:03

Well, it wasn't proven in court, was it? A lot of these things are words on paper or in a text file. Although sometimes the courts would make a crazy ruling, in many cases they rule well. In case with ICQ I doubt the messenger owners can seriously claim ownership to an mp3 file you transferred (not that owning a file is something valid, anyway)

g · July 31, 2009, 21:31:49

I agree, a lot of end user license agreements wouldn't hold up in court.

PabloLuna · October 30, 2009, 19:48:45

So if they get the rights on what I post, will they get sued if I insult someone?

Sam_Zen · October 31, 2009, 00:32:04

LOL

uncloned · October 31, 2009, 00:36:22

Quote from: "PabloLuna"So if they get the rights on what I post, will they get sued if I insult someone?

more likely they'll sue you for misrepresenting the corporate entity.

Pesho_Zmiata · October 31, 2009, 10:14:18

I consider any patent as an obstruction of technological progress.

uncloned · October 31, 2009, 11:33:29

Quote from: "Pesho_Zmiata"I consider any patent as an obstruction of technological progress.

When it comes to manufacturing it does make some sense. For instance I worked for a company that obtained patents on a process which was very expensive to build a plant in order to make a product.

However, software, for instance, does not make sense to be patentable.

Sam_Zen · November 01, 2009, 01:55:42

I agree with Pesho.

And the whole concept of a patent is completely hollowed out already a long time ago.
It's said that Edison wasn't the inventor of the lightbulb, but he was just clever enough to register the idea.

And to claim rights on some strings of programming language is of course ridiculous.

Some years ago the BBC was planning to claim copyright on the use of the URL start "http://",
probably because an employee got the idea.
Funny detail : last week this person has made his public apologies, because, after all,
the second slash was not necessary.