Shouldn't issue patents for minute product features or software anymore.
If you want to patent a device for all it's features, then sure, offer a slight umbrella protection for features under the device, but essentially safeguard the device from being ripped off. When they say "there's more than one way to skin a cat," it's true, but how many variations of "slide to unlock" can there be before everyone patents them and users begin to get annoyed with all the discontinuity between devices. The learning curves are going to get out of hand if everything always works different.
Rather, companies like Apple and Samsung should patent their devices based on aesthetic design, product name, and the complement of features.
We know they largely use similar internal components, sometimes from the same manufacturers, and pay licensing fees for that purpose.
In the interest of keeping the price low without consumers paying 80% of the cost for licensing fees someday, simple actions and hardware shouldn't be able to be patented in these devices.
It's hard for me to say this, because I understand the lone inventor who develops some magnet switch that turns off a screen and should be able to make money for the switch itself, but large companies shouldn't be able to block other companies from designing similar items.
Just because it's a novel idea doesn't mean you're owed millions of dollars.
Any of us could pry open a dvd drive to get a disc out, but if I patented a "disc hole manipulator/drive shooter-outer" and you buy it, great. But if you use a paperclip because it's easier I don't see how I could call Staples and get an injunction to have them stop selling Paperclips....
The patent system is broken in this new digital and microfeature age.
Facebook
Twitter