sorry, i just joined and missed the first part of this, do you have a
link for this?  by the way, the u.s. patent system is different than
most countries, though attempts are being made to harmonize the patent
systems.  one annoying difference, the u.s. is the only place where a
company rather than an individual can apply for and be granted a patent.
 additionally, it's one of the few companies where the police do not
help with patent enforcement and it's entirely up to the patent owner to
fund patent enforcement and pursue all infringers.

imho, all patents should be issued in the name of real people, even if
owned by their employer (which is also widely abused, the local power
company wants to own completely any patent any employee ever comes up
with, even years after leaving that company, and no matter how unrelated
to their business, and even for humble meter readers!  needless to say i
didn't finish that application!)

also, sadly, the patent office, imho, is really, really blowing things
lately.  issuing patents for all kinds of things that should not be
patentable (because they are obvious or are in fact already well known
solutions).  they have had to revoke a number of patents in more
ridiculous cases.  of course the small company or individual rarely has
the legal resources to challenge what is obviously a bad patent,
particularly if large corporations are involved.  even worse, many
government and other researchers are applying and being granted patents
for simple things simply to demonstrate that they are producing work.

in the case of government researchers, working at government agencies i
frankly have a real problem with them receiving patents and charging
high fees for access to publicly funded research meant to benefit the
public in the first place.  for instance NIST has some rather
ridiculously high fees for access to some of their data, fees that
essentially block access by individuals and small companies unless they
are very sure said information will help them.  i do see it as somewhat
reasonable that private researchers at private companies can get patents
on work partially funded by government grants, though i would argue that
the licensing of these patents does perhaps need to be regulated, at
least as far as letting competitors license these patents for a
"reasonable" fee rather than one company having a monopoly on work that
was partially funded by tax dollars.  my tax dollars should be used to
help all, not to help particular companies establish monopolies.
otherwise said companies should provide all of the funding.

"John N. Power" wrote:
>
> > From:         Peter L. Peres[SMTP:plp@ACTCOM.CO.IL]
> > Sent:         Saturday, June 05, 2004 3:39 AM
> > To:   PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> > Subject:      Re: [EE]: Microsoft granted patent on button click timimg
>
> >>I wonder why the US has gone so far from the original
> >>principles of patents?
>
> > Imho because people work less with their hands and more with their heads,
> > and they are trying to capitalize on it by extending an old idea. It does
> > not work so far.
>
> > Peter
---------

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.