tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7431726443399524902.post8795002811871408428..comments2024-01-15T02:26:56.112+02:00Comments on object-e architecture: Of patents, trolls and differential geometries.dimitris gourdoukishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06778788557382305146noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7431726443399524902.post-65094051954429017662011-09-07T22:31:06.458+03:002011-09-07T22:31:06.458+03:00clearly, this is a very bad start. i am wondering ...clearly, this is a very bad start. i am wondering what is going to happen if more companies follow that example. it sound like a nightmare!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7431726443399524902.post-27417496058506341872011-09-05T16:26:01.672+03:002011-09-05T16:26:01.672+03:00I think that it is not just a legal problem (which...I think that it is not just a legal problem (which of course it is) but also a matter of "how we do things". Obviously, they had the right to patent it, and then a court will have the right to decide if someone should pay royalties or no. But what I am saying is that we, as users, designers, programmers etc, have the ability to define behaviors collectively. For example if we promote open or free solutions while at the same time boycotting 'patent-oriented' ones it is quite possible that more and more open processes will be created (the virtue of positive feedback). In a way, it is a matter of bottom-up 'ethics' (a dangerous word, I know) vs top-down laws.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07638622488188009571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7431726443399524902.post-46227248901323875992011-09-05T16:07:53.433+03:002011-09-05T16:07:53.433+03:00I say, if they can patent it, why not? But it seem...I say, if they can patent it, why not? But it seems strange if someone can patent something like this...Marcnoreply@blogger.com