Mindark patents

Turnsleft

Prowler
Joined
Apr 20, 2006
Posts
1,057
Location
UK
Avatar Name
Turnsleft
I hate these kind of patents, they are truly whats wrong with the patent system. Kinda similar to the "One stop shop web based button". I mean wtf? Its an idea not an invention, Im sure an online trading platform in virtual worlds has been done to death in many shapes or form.

Im not against patents or inventors coming up with fantastic ideas, its just the way they get patented that bugs me, rant over ;)
 

Dr.D.C.

Elite
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Posts
4,640
Location
Florida
Society
Glory Hound Irregulars
hmmm sorry and second life?????
 

Ludvig|MindArk

MindArk Official
Staff member
MindArk Official
Moderator
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Posts
15,556
Location
Sweden
Avatar Name
Formerly "Foeburner Nighthawk Delta"
LOL at least they are not doing like worlds.com and their patent thingy :laugh:
 

Legion

Marauder
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Posts
6,324
Location
Sweden
Society
Supremacy Reign
Avatar Name
Iam Flatline Legion
I hate these kind of patents, they are truly whats wrong with the patent system. Kinda similar to the "One stop shop web based button". I mean wtf? Its an idea not an invention, Im sure an online trading platform in virtual worlds has been done to death in many shapes or form.

Im not against patents or inventors coming up with fantastic ideas, its just the way they get patented that bugs me, rant over ;)

I hate patents in any shape and form as they slow down intervention progress. Ie an inventor comes up with an idea and then a big company with loads of cash see this idea and "thinks" it infringes on their patent. They then slam a bunch of lawyers on the poor inventor who has NO way of paying legal fees for 20 years which is about as long as a patent process takes and thus end up selling his invention to the company instead for a whole lot less than it would be worth.

So i think some other form of system has to be implemented.

And yes i do know that an inventor might lose money if the patent system wasnt in place but at the moment i think it hurt more than it helps.

Look a penecilin for example, the reason that is so widely used today and so cheap is due to that the inventor did NOT take a patent on it. :)
 

Centech

Elite
Joined
May 30, 2006
Posts
4,804
Location
Desolation Row
Society
BAHQ4LIFE!!!
Avatar Name
Jason Centech Tanner
Wow the first one could extrapolated to almost anything on the internet.

I actually hold a patent myself for some work I did a few years back at a former employer. If I wanted to I could probably sue a lot of people saying their software products violate the patent. Of course winning a suit would be a whole other matter. Its kind of silly how vague an idea can be and still get patented.
 

Sparhawke

Old Alpha
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Posts
840
Location
England
Society
Children of Atom (Traveller)
I hate patents in any shape and form as they slow down intervention progress. Ie an inventor comes up with an idea and then a big company with loads of cash see this idea and "thinks" it infringes on their patent. They then slam a bunch of lawyers on the poor inventor who has NO way of paying legal fees for 20 years which is about as long as a patent process takes and thus end up selling his invention to the company instead for a whole lot less than it would be worth.

So i think some other form of system has to be implemented.

And yes i do know that an inventor might lose money if the patent system wasnt in place but at the moment i think it hurt more than it helps.

Look a penecilin for example, the reason that is so widely used today and so cheap is due to that the inventor did NOT take a patent on it. :)
http://ev1.org/chevron.htm

Oil companies killed the electric car basically because of this, they bought out the patent and buried it :mad:

They do not work. Period. Full stop.
 

aridash

Slayer
Joined
Nov 29, 2005
Posts
9,289
Location
England
Society
Skillin' Villains
So i think some other form of system has to be implemented.
...
Look a penecilin for example, the reason that is so widely used today and so cheap is due to that the inventor did NOT take a patent on it. :)
but how many inventions where created for financial gain? professional inventors rely on the patent system. Its the scope of what can be patented, or rather what can be applied for, that is the problem. if you had to produce a specific working demonstration for example that would remove many of the spurious "idea" and business method patents.

http://ev1.org/chevron.htm

Oil companies killed the electric car basically because of this, they bought out the patent and buried it :mad:
dont believe half the conspiracist hype. of course an oil company isnt going to pursue an invention against its core buisness, but theres plenty of non-US, non-oil interests developing battery technology (er... like Toyota and Panasonic and the whole electronics industry). the fundemental problem with battery cars is they didnt work for a long time (getting close now), recharge time is still impractical and the cost (materials and environmentally note) is still prohibitive.
 

Leafren

Old Alpha
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Posts
914
Society
cK (Coat Killers)
I hate patents in any shape and form as they slow down intervention progress.
I presume you mean invention? If so:

If I recall correctly from those dreadful intellectual property classes, the patent system was made to promote invention, as it protects the ones putting effort/money into inventing something. So either you got a profound knowledge of intellectual property matters, then I'd like to know how exactly they slow inventions. Amd what do you propose as an alternative system?

Or, you're just making a bold statement about a field you really have no authority in, which I get so tired of on forums.

Look a penecilin for example, the reason that is so widely used today and so cheap is due to that the inventor did NOT take a patent on it.
First of all it wasn't invented. It was discovered. An important nuance in intellectual property rights I imagine (and again I don't know). Isn't there something in intellectual property rights you can't patent something available to all/ present in nature or something along those lines (penicillin is produced by a mold). And aside that I think penecillin was already a 'state of the art' case even when it was discovered arguably.

And secondly. On May 25, 1948, Andrew J Moyer was granted a patent for a method of the mass production of penicillin (source) which flaws the point you try to make I think.

I don't mean to come down on you Legion, I appreciate input and debate, which goes unsaid. This post goes for a lot of threads/posts om EF. I guess what I wanted to point out is that each time I start reading an interesting thread (which I do try here because the community in general acts more mature then on 99% of the other forums I want to visit) there are people making statements which are simply untrue, of what I know, and this pollutes a lot of debates here in my opinion. Which leaves me disappointed and losing interest.
 

Selene B

Old Alpha
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Posts
933
Society
retired/ex-DawnDaemons
Avatar Name
Selene
Wow the first one could extrapolated to almost anything on the internet.

I actually hold a patent myself for some work I did a few years back at a former employer. If I wanted to I could probably sue a lot of people saying their software products violate the patent. Of course winning a suit would be a whole other matter. Its kind of silly how vague an idea can be and still get patented.
sillyness and greed goes to extreme sometimes..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7778767.stm
 

GullyFoyle

Old Alpha
Joined
May 4, 2005
Posts
917
Location
Germany
Society
Freelancer
Avatar Name
Gully Tiger Foyle
First of all it wasn't invented. It was discovered. An important nuance in intellectual property rights I imagine (and again I don't know). Isn't there something in intellectual property rights you can't patent something available to all/ present in nature or something along those lines (penicillin is produced by a mold). And aside that I think penecillin was already a 'state of the art' case even when it was discovered arguably.
Well.... sadly you are wrong...

http://www.greenpeace.org/internati...e-agriculture-and-genetic-pol/patents-on-life
 

jdegre

Elite
Joined
Dec 24, 2005
Posts
2,957
Location
Madrid, Spain
Society
Survival Program
Avatar Name
Jesus jdegre de Gregorio
If I recall correctly from those dreadful intellectual property classes, the patent system was made to promote invention, as it protects the ones putting effort/money into inventing something. So either you got a profound knowledge of intellectual property matters, then I'd like to know how exactly they slow inventions. Amd what do you propose as an alternative system?
i could not agree more. great post leafren.

one thing is the patent system, and something very different is _abusing_ the flaws and weaknesses of the patent system.

and regarding the OP, the links posted there (at least those referred to the WIPO database) show all patent applications since they get accepted by the patent office, and made public. this, by no means, implies that those patents will be eventually granted. they _might_ be granted, but they also may have to be modified if they have claims not acceptable by the patent office, or they may be rejected entirely.
 

Sparhawke

Old Alpha
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Posts
840
Location
England
Society
Children of Atom (Traveller)
You know, if the courts seized all the assets of those who are terminally stupid by putting in these ridiculous patents I am sure there will be far less of them around.
 

Legion

Marauder
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Posts
6,324
Location
Sweden
Society
Supremacy Reign
Avatar Name
Iam Flatline Legion
I presume you mean invention? If so:

If I recall correctly from those dreadful intellectual property classes, the patent system was made to promote invention, as it protects the ones putting effort/money into inventing something. So either you got a profound knowledge of intellectual property matters, then I'd like to know how exactly they slow inventions. Amd what do you propose as an alternative system?

Or, you're just making a bold statement about a field you really have no authority in, which I get so tired of on forums.



First of all it wasn't invented. It was discovered. An important nuance in intellectual property rights I imagine (and again I don't know). Isn't there something in intellectual property rights you can't patent something available to all/ present in nature or something along those lines (penicillin is produced by a mold). And aside that I think penecillin was already a 'state of the art' case even when it was discovered arguably.

And secondly. On May 25, 1948, Andrew J Moyer was granted a patent for a method of the mass production of penicillin (source) which flaws the point you try to make I think.

I don't mean to come down on you Legion, I appreciate input and debate, which goes unsaid. This post goes for a lot of threads/posts om EF. I guess what I wanted to point out is that each time I start reading an interesting thread (which I do try here because the community in general acts more mature then on 99% of the other forums I want to visit) there are people making statements which are simply untrue, of what I know, and this pollutes a lot of debates here in my opinion. Which leaves me disappointed and losing interest.
ok as usuall i was a bit unclear i guess :p But my mind works in mysterious ways :p

But yes the patent system was made to promote invention but today it's more used to make inventors sell their inventions for cheap when a big company slam him with their lawyers. And the info about this stuff i have learnt from a source (which is political so i cant name it here) but they want to improve on the system and such and has thus said a lot about how it works nowadays and the flaws of the system.

This is also how it slows down invention, a patent process in court takes about 15-20 years and no independent inventor can pay those laywer fees, so in the end invention is slowed down.

But what i think needs to be done for a better society and such is that the entire world will have to change. Todays world isnt very good and everyone just think of profit and that is why we have starving people etc.

Just think of what could have been done if there was no patent system and inventors could use each others inventions and invent better versions of them or use their invention in an invention of theirs to better the world. I bet if that was the reality we lived in we would have nano computers by today. (ok a lil exageration but u get the point) :p
 

GullyFoyle

Old Alpha
Joined
May 4, 2005
Posts
917
Location
Germany
Society
Freelancer
Avatar Name
Gully Tiger Foyle
Only in America.....
Wrong... that was just the first side I found in english language because I normally read things like that in german (complicated enough anyway...).
 

Nirfu

Elite
Joined
May 14, 2006
Posts
2,824
Location
Sweden
Society
Rapture of Rebellion
Avatar Name
Nirfu Nirfu Merlin
One of the problems today is that most inventions comes from companies, not persons. In the old days guys like Tesla, Eddison, Ford etc could invent things using there own money and will. Today it's all in the hands of the big companies. And also they just try to patent everything they can. Look at DNA strings, this is like pencilin, just because you where the one who found the gene pattern you don't have the right to it. Same with general ideas like the patent this is about. That kind of patents is just redicilous. But it's hard today to defend your rights to your inventions. If you invent a new spring, it's easy to explain and file a drawing of it. Today with a few lines of code, how can you protect that?
At the same time patents is not what makes you rich. Take the Bic pen, it was invented by a guy calle LAslo Biro (or similar) then he sold it to the Bic-something familly who was more clever in marketing.
Same with paintings, music and other creative works, here we have another set of rules. The one who does it has the right to it untill he dies, and then his family inherit it. Very strange indeed. A patent you hold for a certain amount of time.
Patents is also a hard thing in pharmacy business. It takes billions to create a drug, and then peoples oppinion is that it should be free just cause it's badly needed. Here the patent protect the research cost invested and only after a time other companies can produce cheap copies, hopefully the inventing company got there investment back. But wouldn't it be beutifull if the research could be for free and everyone could benefit of the result?

Just some patent thoughts put down...
 

Legion

Marauder
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Posts
6,324
Location
Sweden
Society
Supremacy Reign
Avatar Name
Iam Flatline Legion
Patents is also a hard thing in pharmacy business. It takes billions to create a drug, and then peoples oppinion is that it should be free just cause it's badly needed. Here the patent protect the research cost invested and only after a time other companies can produce cheap copies, hopefully the inventing company got there investment back. But wouldn't it be beutifull if the research could be for free and everyone could benefit of the result?

Just some patent thoughts put down...
hah! dont get me started on the phamacy industry and patents. Their methods are totally rotten.
 

nlnforever

Prowler
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Posts
1,202
Avatar Name
Nguyen NLNFOREVER Nhung
From MA patents:

The unique feature of the invention is a financial system in which users (A) of the system can use real money (P) to purchase virtual things or services which only exist in electronic or virtual form, or which can be stored digitally and can be utilized in a non-physical world/universe, i.e. a virtual world/univer

I think MA can sue any 'online games' now with the 'cashshop system', where you can buy 'cash-items' which can be used by your avatar in-game by using real money.

Stupidity. Human never learns until they dead.
 

Rayne Jade

Marauder
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Posts
5,517
Location
WoF 2011 is coming :)
Society
GloryHound Irregulars
Avatar Name
Rayne Jade Blackmoore
It is most disturbing to me that research seems to have left the university arena and is now done primarily in privately owned labs. Corporations control those, and thus big bucks are expected on the discoveries. Gone are the days when scientists and researchers did it all for the good of mankind. I think patents on genes are the most frightening of all...
 

Nobatbbi

Alpha
Joined
Jan 21, 2008
Posts
656
Location
near Chicago
Society
Brainstormers - Communications Officer
Avatar Name
Donatello Donatello Nobatti
Wow the first one could extrapolated to almost anything on the internet.

I actually hold a patent myself for some work I did a few years back at a former employer. If I wanted to I could probably sue a lot of people saying their software products violate the patent. Of course winning a suit would be a whole other matter. Its kind of silly how vague an idea can be and still get patented.
you hold it? or your employer holds it more likely....
 

Joat

Elite
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Posts
4,049
Society
M.I.S
Yeah, saw these some years ago, and also a thesis about PE/EU since
2002 I think... ;)
 

Leafren

Old Alpha
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Posts
914
Society
cK (Coat Killers)
On the patenting of genes, I know of one case where such a patent was contested/fought by, amongst others, a former professor of mine (the so called 'breast cancer gene' BRCA1) and they indeed got the patent nullified. Undoubtly there are also cases in which genes/organisms did get patented in certain countries and this is very worrysome indeed. Without getting to technical, you can 'change' these organisms, genetically engineer them, or genes for that matter. At what point does it become an invention? I imagine many lawyers are busy with these matters every day. As in every field there must be a lot of grey areas.

It is most disturbing to me that research seems to have left the university arena and is now done primarily in privately owned labs. Corporations control those, and thus big bucks are expected on the discoveries. Gone are the days when scientists and researchers did it all for the good of mankind. I think patents on genes are the most frightening of all...
I see your point, but hopefully I can make you a bit less sad. Academic research in biomedical research is thriving. I don't have any numbers on this (don't know where to look) but I guess the vast majority of scientific discoveries are still made in academic labs. I would also like to bring up the corporations have the most interest in the good of mankind, if you mean develop drugs/aids, as it's their core and only business. Academic labs on the other hand often do fundamental research aimed only at broadening out knowledge of the world around us, not directly aimed at helping mankind. Of course with this knowledge often comes applications like new drugs and so. I do agree a lot more money should flow to laboratories everywhere though.

Oh and the wages of scientists should increase too if you ask me :)
 

Legion

Marauder
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Posts
6,324
Location
Sweden
Society
Supremacy Reign
Avatar Name
Iam Flatline Legion
I would also like to bring up the corporations have the most interest in the good of mankind, if you mean develop drugs/aids, as it's their core and only business.

corporations or well 99% of all corporations dont give a flying f%&& about in the good of mankind, and especially not pharmacy companies. The only thing they think of is profit and that's the only thing. If they changed how they operate i could agree to change my mind though but as it is now nope not a chance.
 

aridash

Slayer
Joined
Nov 29, 2005
Posts
9,289
Location
England
Society
Skillin' Villains
From MA patents:

The unique feature of the invention is a financial system in which users (A) of the system can use real money (P) to purchase virtual things or services which only exist in electronic or virtual form, or which can be stored digitally and can be utilized in a non-physical world/universe, i.e. a virtual world/univer

I think MA can sue any 'online games' now with the 'cashshop system', where you can buy 'cash-items' which can be used by your avatar in-game by using real money.
intersting if this does hold up (ie is there no prior art or does it cover a wide enough scope), this might explain the issue of no competition. im pretty sure being able to buy "virtual things or services which only exist in electronic or virtual form" has been around since the early days of t'interweb, even before if you consider some inancial instruments to be virtual (they dont exist other than as a computer record).

corporations or well 99% of all corporations dont give a flying f%&& about in the good of mankind, and especially not pharmacy companies.
ah, so cynical... i think they are more pragmatic than that, they need mankind to buy their products.
 

Leafren

Old Alpha
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Posts
914
Society
cK (Coat Killers)
corporations or well 99% of all corporations dont give a flying f%&& about in the good of mankind, and especially not pharmacy companies. The only thing they think of is profit and that's the only thing. If they changed how they operate i could agree to change my mind though but as it is now nope not a chance.
And how do you think they get a drug through clinical trails without it having any beneficial effects? Those trails are pretty extensive believe me. Of course their aim is to make money, they are companies often with shareholders. But to make a lot of money they'll need a product that benefits a lot of people. I know, a lot is rotten in the pharmaceutical business (making people think they need something, a good example of that is children eating cholesterol lowering butters etc, you might as well let them smoke then / only researching pathologies with a high frequency to maximise potential profits, etc). You exaggerate (again) Legion. Why the urge to state your opinions so black/white. Almost everything is grey. I'd love to see gouvernments get rid of the excesses in this pharmaceutical industry, but I do think we're better off with them then without 99% of all the corporations which you seem to suggest.
 

Legion

Marauder
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Posts
6,324
Location
Sweden
Society
Supremacy Reign
Avatar Name
Iam Flatline Legion
And how do you think they get a drug through clinical trails without it having any beneficial effects? Those trails are pretty extensive believe me. Of course their aim is to make money, they are companies often with shareholders. But to make a lot of money they'll need a product that benefits a lot of people. I know, a lot is rotten in the pharmaceutical business (making people think they need something, a good example of that is children eating cholesterol lowering butters etc, you might as well let them smoke then / only researching pathologies with a high frequency to maximise potential profits, etc). You exaggerate (again) Legion. Why the urge to state your opinions so black/white. Almost everything is grey. I'd love to see gouvernments get rid of the excesses in this pharmaceutical industry, but I do think we're better off with them then without 99% of all the corporations which you seem to suggest.
Yes i know the trials are good and such but that's not what i'm talking about, i'm talking about how the corporations operate. For example...

The companies spend most of their money on overly high salaries and on promotion to buy x drug cause it's good for you and spend almost nothing of their money (if you compare it to the amount they spend on pr) on researching new stuff. Yes a ceo etc should have a high salary but the ones these guys get are just retarded. I cant remember all the stuff right now that i have read about this stuff but trust me it's not a nice business.
 
Top