ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!
Difference between revisions of "Software patent quality worse than all other fields"
Steelpillow (talk | contribs) (rvv of 18 June) |
m (→See also: * http://www.ffii.org/Why_software_patents_are_trivial) |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
* [http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/blog/2004/05/08/software-patents-need-to-go/ Some Kodak patents] | * [http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/blog/2004/05/08/software-patents-need-to-go/ Some Kodak patents] | ||
− | == | + | ==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}== |
* [[Raising standards is not our goal]] | * [[Raising standards is not our goal]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==External links== | ||
+ | * http://www.ffii.org/Why_software_patents_are_trivial | ||
[[Category:Arguments]] | [[Category:Arguments]] |
Revision as of 18:35, 15 August 2009
Quality problems can happen in any category of patents, but the quality of software patents is particularly bad.
Contents
Possible reasons
- Abstract algorithms can be described in so many ways
- Jargon and lack of tangible components can make a mundane software idea sound technical
The disclosed information is useless
(Maybe this should be a separate page/argument, but let's wait until this page grows first.)
Examples
- Unbelievable software patents
- FFII's webshop which uses 20 ideas patented in the EU
- Microsoft developer's internal comments about his own patents indecipherable by anyone but a patent attorney
- Some Kodak patents