If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Apple and Google now spend more on buying and defending patents than R&D   (nytimes.com) divider line 36
    More: Fail, Google, Posner, plain, Nuance Communications  
•       •       •

896 clicks; posted to Business » on 08 Oct 2012 at 11:52 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



36 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-08 12:00:01 PM
with patents you are paying teams of lawyers. with R&D you are paying science/programmer guys(and gals!)

who do you think costs more?
 
2012-10-08 12:01:14 PM
But patents cause innovation!
 
2012-10-08 12:01:33 PM

SuperT: with patents you are paying teams of lawyers. with R&D you are paying science/programmer guys(and gals!)

who do you think costs more?


lawyer fees can be taken out of the settlement, so the science/programmer guys cost far more. Did I guess right?
 
2012-10-08 12:04:18 PM
It's the American WAY!
 
2012-10-08 12:19:58 PM
To be fair - Apple started it.
 
2012-10-08 12:33:46 PM

Heraclitus: It's the American WAY!


this isn't exclusively an American problem.

FTA: In the smartphone industry alone, according to a Stanford University analysis, as much as $20 billion was spent on patent litigation and patent purchases in the last two years - an amount equal to eight Mars rover missions.

so that would include the Koreans, Taiwanese, Japanese, and Finns.
 
2012-10-08 12:34:35 PM
Self-sustaining circle of patent trolls
 
2012-10-08 12:41:10 PM
I can't imagine why innovation is suffering, or point to a better indicator of our failing education system. We really are turning into a nation of B-Ark crew members.

/obscure? I hope not.
 
2012-10-08 12:42:12 PM

Chabash: SuperT: with patents you are paying teams of lawyers. with R&D you are paying science/programmer guys(and gals!)

who do you think costs more?

lawyer fees can be taken out of the settlement, so the science/programmer guys cost far more. Did I guess right?


Most patent lawyers bill by the hour.

Excuse me, let me be more accurate: Most patent lawyers bill a shiat ton of money by the hour. Not any swinging dick with a law degree can sit for the patent bar. You have to have a JD plus a bachelors of science or higher in a "hard science" or engineering to sit for the exam. So, most of us who screwed around getting a liberal arts degree aren't qualified to sit for it.
 
2012-10-08 01:06:15 PM
Hey.

Hey.

Thaetus. Where's your 'patents save money' argument now?
 
2012-10-08 01:12:36 PM
A is the expected revenue from suits, as projected by lawyers.
B is the expected revenue from features, as projected by marketers.
C is the expected revenue from exclusive apps/devices, as projected by engineering departments.

A, plus B, plus C, equals X. If X is less than the amount of expected revenue from defending the perceived patent in court, we don't develop that technology.
 
2012-10-08 01:14:52 PM
Microsoft says keep it up suckers
 
2012-10-08 01:15:02 PM

Nabb1: Chabash: SuperT: with patents you are paying teams of lawyers. with R&D you are paying science/programmer guys(and gals!)

who do you think costs more?

lawyer fees can be taken out of the settlement, so the science/programmer guys cost far more. Did I guess right?

Most patent lawyers bill by the hour.

Excuse me, let me be more accurate: Most patent lawyers bill a shiat ton of money by the hour. Not any swinging dick with a law degree can sit for the patent bar. You have to have a JD plus a bachelors of science or higher in a "hard science" or engineering to sit for the exam. So, most of us who screwed around getting a liberal arts degree aren't qualified to sit for it.


I've always thought, if I ever sold out as a scientist and became a husk of a person with no soul, moral guidance, or general give-a-shiattery about the march of technology and the enabling of thehuman mind to create, then being a patent lawyer would be a sweet gig.

CSB, at my Undergrad school there were always lawyers coming around to try and convince the chemist, engineers, and high science people to go to law school after ward.
 
2012-10-08 01:42:28 PM
Too bad our legislature is too politically paralyzed to do anything about it.
 
2012-10-08 02:58:09 PM

clkeagle: I can't imagine why innovation is suffering, or point to a better indicator of our failing education system. We really are turning into a nation of B-Ark crew members.

/obscure? I hope not.


It's obscure in the same way that Princess Bride quotes are obscure.
 
2012-10-08 03:47:31 PM

Kinek: Nabb1: Chabash: SuperT: with patents you are paying teams of lawyers. with R&D you are paying science/programmer guys(and gals!)

who do you think costs more?

lawyer fees can be taken out of the settlement, so the science/programmer guys cost far more. Did I guess right?

Most patent lawyers bill by the hour.

Excuse me, let me be more accurate: Most patent lawyers bill a shiat ton of money by the hour. Not any swinging dick with a law degree can sit for the patent bar. You have to have a JD plus a bachelors of science or higher in a "hard science" or engineering to sit for the exam. So, most of us who screwed around getting a liberal arts degree aren't qualified to sit for it.

I've always thought, if I ever sold out as a scientist and became a husk of a person with no soul, moral guidance, or general give-a-shiattery about the march of technology and the enabling of thehuman mind to create, then being a patent lawyer would be a sweet gig.

CSB, at my Undergrad school there were always lawyers coming around to try and convince the chemist, engineers, and high science people to go to law school after ward.


Hurrah, I'm a husk of a person with no soul.
 
2012-10-08 04:04:38 PM

RexTalionis: Kinek: Nabb1: Chabash: SuperT: with patents you are paying teams of lawyers. with R&D you are paying science/programmer guys(and gals!)

who do you think costs more?

lawyer fees can be taken out of the settlement, so the science/programmer guys cost far more. Did I guess right?

Most patent lawyers bill by the hour.

Excuse me, let me be more accurate: Most patent lawyers bill a shiat ton of money by the hour. Not any swinging dick with a law degree can sit for the patent bar. You have to have a JD plus a bachelors of science or higher in a "hard science" or engineering to sit for the exam. So, most of us who screwed around getting a liberal arts degree aren't qualified to sit for it.

I've always thought, if I ever sold out as a scientist and became a husk of a person with no soul, moral guidance, or general give-a-shiattery about the march of technology and the enabling of thehuman mind to create, then being a patent lawyer would be a sweet gig.

CSB, at my Undergrad school there were always lawyers coming around to try and convince the chemist, engineers, and high science people to go to law school after ward.

Hurrah, I'm a husk of a person with no soul.


Everyone hates lawyers until they need one.
 
2012-10-08 04:30:50 PM

Kinek: Hey.

Hey.

Thaetus. Where's your 'patents save money' argument now?


Would you care to at least briefly sum up the argument you believe I'm making so that I know where exactly to correct you?
 
2012-10-08 05:16:05 PM

Theaetetus: Kinek: Hey.

Hey.

Thaetus. Where's your 'patents save money' argument now?

Would you care to at least briefly sum up the argument you believe I'm making so that I know where exactly to correct you?


Your argument for patents has constantly been 'one patent saves thousands of Man hours and the savings is passed on in the form of lower costs.'

In light of litigation costing more than R&D, it seems priorities are out of sync. My assertion in previous threads has been that money spent on litigation has not been spent on R&D, thus retarding progress. It seems that this assertion is verified when companies spend more money on lawyers than they do on improving business that they're actually in.
 
2012-10-08 05:17:44 PM

Mad_Radhu: RexTalionis: Kinek: Nabb1: Chabash: SuperT: with patents you are paying teams of lawyers. with R&D you are paying science/programmer guys(and gals!)

who do you think costs more?

lawyer fees can be taken out of the settlement, so the science/programmer guys cost far more. Did I guess right?

Most patent lawyers bill by the hour.

Excuse me, let me be more accurate: Most patent lawyers bill a shiat ton of money by the hour. Not any swinging dick with a law degree can sit for the patent bar. You have to have a JD plus a bachelors of science or higher in a "hard science" or engineering to sit for the exam. So, most of us who screwed around getting a liberal arts degree aren't qualified to sit for it.

I've always thought, if I ever sold out as a scientist and became a husk of a person with no soul, moral guidance, or general give-a-shiattery about the march of technology and the enabling of thehuman mind to create, then being a patent lawyer would be a sweet gig.

CSB, at my Undergrad school there were always lawyers coming around to try and convince the chemist, engineers, and high science people to go to law school after ward.

Hurrah, I'm a husk of a person with no soul.

Everyone hates lawyers until they need one.


The only reason you need a patent lawyer is because there's another patent lawyer threatening you. So no. There's definitely a reason to hate the patent lawyer.
 
2012-10-08 05:24:58 PM

Mad_Radhu: Everyone hates lawyers until they need one.


No, they still hate lawyers. Just because you need something doesn't mean you don't hate it. Especially when the bill shows up.
 
2012-10-08 05:33:38 PM
Here's an idea, make it illegal for entities to own patents, only the person who came up with the thing can hold the patent. Or failing that, make them non-salable, so if a business that does hold patents goes under, the patents automatically expire. Though I think the first is a better idea, but the second does at least solve some issues.
 
2012-10-08 05:36:19 PM

Kinek: Theaetetus: Kinek: Hey.

Hey.

Thaetus. Where's your 'patents save money' argument now?

Would you care to at least briefly sum up the argument you believe I'm making so that I know where exactly to correct you?

Your argument for patents has constantly been 'one patent saves thousands of Man hours and the savings is passed on in the form of lower costs.'


Hmm... Nope, not really. In fact, I don't believe I ever said anything about "the savings is passed on in the form of lower costs." And the first part is similar to something I said, but in the same way that Michelle Obama said "whitey": all the same syllables, but in a different order.
It's tough to distill a policy argument down to a single sentence, but I think the closest would be something more like "the additional public disclosure encouraged by patents saves thousands of man hours duplicating already disclosed research, such that those hours then be focused on new research, resulting in an increased pace of innovation." See the difference?
And no, this article doesn't change anything about that.

In light of litigation costing more than R&D, it seems priorities are out of sync. My assertion in previous threads has been that money spent on litigation has not been spent on R&D, thus retarding progress. It seems that this assertion is verified when companies spend more money on lawyers than they do on improving business that they're actually in.

Only if you didn't bother reading the article, but just went by Subby's headline. "Litigation" doesn't cost more than "R&D". A careful reading of the article will explain the discrepancy.
 
2012-10-08 05:41:04 PM

Kinek: The only reason you need a patent lawyer is because there's another patent lawyer threatening you. So no. There's definitely a reason to hate the patent lawyer.


Not really. If a patent lawyer (or any other lawyer) is threatening you, you just need a regular lawyer. That's litigation. You need a patent lawyer because you've come up with a great idea, and want to protect it from being stolen by your competitors, or because you want to license the idea to one or more companies to manufacture something, or because you have a competitor with some great ideas and you want to initiate a trade. We're on the business and prosecution side of things, not the litigation side. If everything goes according to plan, I'll never see the inside of a courtroom.
 
2012-10-08 05:48:58 PM

Theaetetus: Kinek: Theaetetus: Kinek: Hey.

Hey.

Thaetus. Where's your 'patents save money' argument now?

Would you care to at least briefly sum up the argument you believe I'm making so that I know where exactly to correct you?

Your argument for patents has constantly been 'one patent saves thousands of Man hours and the savings is passed on in the form of lower costs.'

Hmm... Nope, not really. In fact, I don't believe I ever said anything about "the savings is passed on in the form of lower costs." And the first part is similar to something I said, but in the same way that Michelle Obama said "whitey": all the same syllables, but in a different order.
It's tough to distill a policy argument down to a single sentence, but I think the closest would be something more like "the additional public disclosure encouraged by patents saves thousands of man hours duplicating already disclosed research, such that those hours then be focused on new research, resulting in an increased pace of innovation." See the difference?
And no, this article doesn't change anything about that.

In light of litigation costing more than R&D, it seems priorities are out of sync. My assertion in previous threads has been that money spent on litigation has not been spent on R&D, thus retarding progress. It seems that this assertion is verified when companies spend more money on lawyers than they do on improving business that they're actually in.

Only if you didn't bother reading the article, but just went by Subby's headline. "Litigation" doesn't cost more than "R&D". A careful reading of the article will explain the discrepancy.


So that's your version. That patents free up man hours. Do you have any proof? Because some of these massive legal departments and expensive trials that hinge on patents seem to suggest that for the money paying for lawyers, I can afford to pay a couple teams of engineers to do something else. The eight times that an application can be resubmitted until they hit the jackpot? That's my proof. That money that is spent on defending and prosecuting most of these bullshiat cases could have been better used actually making products. Rather than competition through the legal system.

I have value deducted in the cost of cases and lawyers. Where's the value added of Patent lawyers?
 
2012-10-08 06:01:55 PM

Kinek: So that's your version.


Y'know, I'm gonna stop you here for a second.
You called me out in this thread. You misrepresented my argument. And when I corrected you on what was my argument, you say "that's your version"?
If you're going to be an asshole, then I'm not going to waste my time on you.
If you want to dial it back down from here...
imgs.sfgate.com
to here...
img.photobucket.com
then we can talk like adults, mmmkay?
 
2012-10-08 06:07:56 PM

Theaetetus: Kinek: So that's your version.

Y'know, I'm gonna stop you here for a second.
You called me out in this thread. You misrepresented my argument. And when I corrected you on what was my argument, you say "that's your version"?
If you're going to be an asshole, then I'm not going to waste my time on you.
If you want to dial it back down from here...
[imgs.sfgate.com image 500x284]
to here...
[img.photobucket.com image 360x247]
then we can talk like adults, mmmkay?


And there's the smarm anybody who has ever been in a patent thread with you will recognize instantly. Your mindview is literally so warped that you cannot comprehend that what you do has any kind of detrimental effect on society. It's not even a possibility. I called you out because every patent thread it's the same smug attitude, and this time, when we have a judge saying this is messed up, massive legal budgets being pissed into lawyer's coffers instead of being used to do business, and the New york times questioning the Patent Kool-aid, you still can't comprehend that you and your Ilk are a cure worse than the disease of imitation.
 
2012-10-08 06:11:22 PM

Kinek: And there's the smarm anybody who has ever been in a patent thread with you will recognize instantly. Your mindview is literally so warped that you cannot comprehend that what you do has any kind of detrimental effect on society. It's not even a possibility.


No, that's just "your version".

But I see you're unwilling to actually have a civil discussion on this topic. Fair enough - I gave you plenty of opportunity, and even responded to you what, three times, putting up with your acidic bullshiat? Okay, I get the message: you have nothing substantive to say and just want to waste time.
 
2012-10-08 06:16:12 PM

Theaetetus: Kinek: And there's the smarm anybody who has ever been in a patent thread with you will recognize instantly. Your mindview is literally so warped that you cannot comprehend that what you do has any kind of detrimental effect on society. It's not even a possibility.

No, that's just "your version".

But I see you're unwilling to actually have a civil discussion on this topic. Fair enough - I gave you plenty of opportunity, and even responded to you what, three times, putting up with your acidic bullshiat? Okay, I get the message: you have nothing substantive to say and just want to waste time.


Except my version is backed up with facts. Disclosure. Massive multi billion dollar portfolios that could have employed division upon divisions of people who actually created for what? The right to sue, or not be sued. Run away. Sure. You tend to stay out of arguments you can't win. It's not my version. It's the facts. You can't prove that patents benefit people. I can point to money flushed down the crapper and definitively say that that is doing anything but paying for protection money from lawyers.
 
2012-10-08 07:09:05 PM

Theaetetus: Kinek: And there's the smarm anybody who has ever been in a patent thread with you will recognize instantly. Your mindview is literally so warped that you cannot comprehend that what you do has any kind of detrimental effect on society. It's not even a possibility.

No, that's just "your version".

But I see you're unwilling to actually have a civil discussion on this topic. Fair enough - I gave you plenty of opportunity, and even responded to you what, three times, putting up with your acidic bullshiat? Okay, I get the message: you have nothing substantive to say and just want to waste time.


Yeah...I'm with the other guy on this one. You're pretty famous for doing pretty much exactly what Kinek is calling you on.
 
2012-10-08 07:45:01 PM

Xythero: Too bad our legislature is too politically paralyzed

busy cashing cheques from Google, Apple
and all the other patent-troll companies to do anything about it.

FTFY, not that I'm cynical or anything.
 
2012-10-08 07:55:17 PM

change1211: Theaetetus: Kinek: And there's the smarm anybody who has ever been in a patent thread with you will recognize instantly. Your mindview is literally so warped that you cannot comprehend that what you do has any kind of detrimental effect on society. It's not even a possibility.

No, that's just "your version".

But I see you're unwilling to actually have a civil discussion on this topic. Fair enough - I gave you plenty of opportunity, and even responded to you what, three times, putting up with your acidic bullshiat? Okay, I get the message: you have nothing substantive to say and just want to waste time.

Yeah...I'm with the other guy on this one. You're pretty famous for doing pretty much exactly what Kinek is calling you on.


Really? 'Cause in this thread, I replied politely to him three times, explaining my position. If that's considered smarm, and his asinine replies are what you'd prefer, then maybe Fark and Reddit are becoming more alike than we thought.
 
2012-10-09 01:19:45 AM
Ignoring the obvious problems with the US and European patent systems for a moment - buying patents is part of the R&D process and can accelerate delivery of new products.

/that being said - the system is royally fark'd up
 
2012-10-09 04:02:39 AM

Theaetetus: change1211: Theaetetus: Kinek: And there's the smarm anybody who has ever been in a patent thread with you will recognize instantly. Your mindview is literally so warped that you cannot comprehend that what you do has any kind of detrimental effect on society. It's not even a possibility.

No, that's just "your version".

But I see you're unwilling to actually have a civil discussion on this topic. Fair enough - I gave you plenty of opportunity, and even responded to you what, three times, putting up with your acidic bullshiat? Okay, I get the message: you have nothing substantive to say and just want to waste time.

Yeah...I'm with the other guy on this one. You're pretty famous for doing pretty much exactly what Kinek is calling you on.

Really? 'Cause in this thread, I replied politely to him three times, explaining my position. If that's considered smarm, and his asinine replies are what you'd prefer, then maybe Fark and Reddit are becoming more alike than we thought.


You are correct, Theaetetus, IN THIS THREAD what you say is indeed true. But Change and Kinek may also be correct. They are referring to prior threads, you see.

So it is quite possible for the three of you to all be correct in this argument.

And, Kinek, as I lack the context outside of this thread, you did come on a bit too aggressively for what Theaetetus presented here.
 
2012-10-09 10:24:59 AM

Wisdomsage: Theaetetus: change1211: Theaetetus: Kinek: And there's the smarm anybody who has ever been in a patent thread with you will recognize instantly. Your mindview is literally so warped that you cannot comprehend that what you do has any kind of detrimental effect on society. It's not even a possibility.

No, that's just "your version".

But I see you're unwilling to actually have a civil discussion on this topic. Fair enough - I gave you plenty of opportunity, and even responded to you what, three times, putting up with your acidic bullshiat? Okay, I get the message: you have nothing substantive to say and just want to waste time.

Yeah...I'm with the other guy on this one. You're pretty famous for doing pretty much exactly what Kinek is calling you on.

Really? 'Cause in this thread, I replied politely to him three times, explaining my position. If that's considered smarm, and his asinine replies are what you'd prefer, then maybe Fark and Reddit are becoming more alike than we thought.

You are correct, Theaetetus, IN THIS THREAD what you say is indeed true. But Change and Kinek may also be correct. They are referring to prior threads, you see.

So it is quite possible for the three of you to all be correct in this argument.

And, Kinek, as I lack the context outside of this thread, you did come on a bit too aggressively for what Theaetetus presented here.


This is probably true. Reading the article I got a bit overexcited because this is another point of evidence in a continuing argument. I'm sorry Thaetus for being aggressive. You are an intelligent person. You argue well, even if your snark meter seems to be cranked a little too high. I've just seen what patents do in science (I was once involved with a lab that was looking at a BRCAII issue and before we got anywhere, a lawyer came in and shut us down because we were too close to the Myriad patent and were in danger of being sued) and wish there wasn't such an intrenched interest in arming sides. And I view patent lawyers as the main profiteers from this war. The mentality that this is improving things, or that lawsuits 'serve to progress the arts and sciences' is so messed up that I can't even start to untangle it save through evidence.

Patents as disclosure does not work. Especially with so many sue-happy lawyers around. Scientists will stay away from hotspots, or will be shut down if there's a risk. Seeing the smartphone patent thicket and the multitudes of lawsuits, I'd really like Thaetus to actually trot out the evidence that this is doing anything to improve advancement of anything except lawyer's wallets.
 
2012-10-09 10:25:32 AM

gingerjet: Ignoring the obvious problems with the US and European patent systems for a moment


Why ignore them ever?

- buying patents is part of the R&D process and can accelerate delivery of new products.

Sooo..... if we had some bacon, we could have bacon and eggs.... if we had some eggs.

Patents are stage 3 bowel cancer in the body of science and engineering.
 
Displayed 36 of 36 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report