Difference between revisions of "A bubble waiting to burst"
m (* [http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090908164954318 Microsoft sells patents that allegedly cover GNU/Linux] - which I guess is an attempt to make money from those in the speculation market) |
m (indeed) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The problem of '''speculation''' is that by granting software patents which are mostly not being used as a property right (not going to court) but which are being as proof for financial deals, we're moving to a situation where one day there will be companies failing and ''then'' they'll start looking for what money their patents can get them. This could aggravate the [[patent troll]] problem if failing software companies look to outsource the monetising of their patents to "experts". | The problem of '''speculation''' is that by granting software patents which are mostly not being used as a property right (not going to court) but which are being as proof for financial deals, we're moving to a situation where one day there will be companies failing and ''then'' they'll start looking for what money their patents can get them. This could aggravate the [[patent troll]] problem if failing software companies look to outsource the monetising of their patents to "experts". | ||
| − | ''(Can someone check if I've understood this: In the [[USA]], a Federal Circuit court confirmed that when a patent is used to secure a loan, and the loan goes unpaid, the transfer of a patent by foreclosure does allow the new owner to enforce the patent.<ref>http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/08-1606.pdf</ref>)'' | + | ''(Can someone check if I've understood this: In the [[USA]], a Federal Circuit court confirmed that when a patent is used to secure a loan, and the loan goes unpaid, the transfer of a patent by foreclosure does indeed allow the new owner to enforce the patent.<ref>http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/08-1606.pdf</ref>)'' |
==Microsoft against speculators== | ==Microsoft against speculators== | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
| + | {{page footer}} | ||
[[Category:Arguments]] | [[Category:Arguments]] | ||
| − | |||
Revision as of 19:48, 4 January 2010
The problem of speculation is that by granting software patents which are mostly not being used as a property right (not going to court) but which are being as proof for financial deals, we're moving to a situation where one day there will be companies failing and then they'll start looking for what money their patents can get them. This could aggravate the patent troll problem if failing software companies look to outsource the monetising of their patents to "experts".
(Can someone check if I've understood this: In the USA, a Federal Circuit court confirmed that when a patent is used to secure a loan, and the loan goes unpaid, the transfer of a patent by foreclosure does indeed allow the new owner to enforce the patent.[1])
Microsoft against speculators
In the 2009 i4i v. Microsoft court case, the Microsoft lawyers compared i4i inc. to the banks asking for bailouts.[2]
Andy Grove
External links
- Microsoft sells patents that allegedly cover GNU/Linux - which I guess is an attempt to make money from those in the speculation market
