< Pop Ups Patented
- Started
- Last post
- 24 Responses
- jox
That's just stupid. How the hell can you patent a code snippet?
And what's this:
"Shuster recently received a patent for the ad format"... I didn't know pop-ups had certain formats?
I'm going for the body-tag now people, godamn I'm gonna make a fortune!
- jox0
And for the lazy bunch
- kpl0
this is great news.
think about it: it costs more for a pop-up -> less pop-ups.
- Gorbie0
I patented the "blink" tag.
That didn't get me anywhere.
- BonSeff0
what a turd. porn sites are full of honest savory individuals. im sure they will more than happy to comply, no matter what country they are operating
- AD0
It speaks to a problem that continually seems to be occuring these days - judges ruling on technolgy cases when they don't understand what the hell they're talkinga bout
or in this case - whoever is responsible for allowing this patent to be purchased
how can you make legal decisions when you don't know what you're talking about
- unknown0
how could you possibly know wether or not the judge knows what he's talking about?
Just because he's a judge doesn't mean he hasn't logged onto hotbitches.com and got pissed off at pop-ups while he's jerkin off.
- Redmond0
I hate pop-ups. I don't believe that they make money off them. It must be some pyramidal scam. I'm sure someone somewhere is losing money in this.
- Redmond0
Also, I'm shocked when I see ads for gambling on sites like msn or stuff for hidden cameras where it's clearly shown:"hey use this to jerk-off girls while they don't know you're watching them". More and more regular sites have ads like that.
- jox0
Pilgrim:
It's pretty obvious that the person deciding this isn't very familiar with code at all - You can't choose whatever code you want in a certain language and make it "yours". Sure, I wouldn't mind getting rid of all pop-ups out there either, but what's next? Drop downs? Maybe Iframes? The code belongs to the person who wrote it, end of story.
It's like if you would go out and patent all red houses.
- unknown0
"use this to jerk-off girls while they don't know you're watching them"
heh heh
- unknown0
If you're right, Jox, I agree with you. That definately would be the wrong person to be judging that case.
I'm just wondering how you know this?
- jox0
How I know what? That you can't patent someone elses stuff?
- kpl0
geez, you guys should at least read the
or if you want to comment on patents being given in ignorance, know something bout the patent process first.
first, there is no judge involved. it's the US patent office, and what they do is follow the patent rules. if there's a problem, its not their fault. it's the rules' fault. in this case, congress still hasn't
2nd: the article makes it quite clear that internet patents aren't exactly enforcable, no one won an internet patent case yet.
3rd: this guy is a total idiot. no way to stop sound from streaming? can't surf the web in silence ever again? whatever mang, as long as there's an off button on the speaker, it's ineffective. and lab experiments aren't the real world. those audio ads will just kill whatever traffic goes to that site in the first place.
- AD0
dude, it's pretty obvious the patent officer or whoever doesn't know what hes talking about - he patented a freaking popup window - if it's not asinine, then I'm going to patent the onClick event or a the .html extension
my point about judges and law makers ruling without understanding what they're ruling on or the precedence they are setting was directed moe at recent such cases - like the 1-click mentioned in that article or judges telling companies to turn off p2p apps even though they can't actually do that as they don't run on a central servers - stuff like that
- kpl0
hmm...weird.
"at least read the" article first...
"and congress still hasn't" updated the patent laws.
- AD0
that was 4 pilgrim
not kpl - who knows more then I
- kpl0
the law is a complicated beast. if judges don't know shit, they are provided with experts provided by both defendant and plaintiff. it's not the judge's ignorance that is the problem, it's the law.
what criteria of a patent does it not meet? nothing is obvious with the law.
plus, after appeals everything tends to get sorted out. judges make mistakes (usually due to misinformation from a party) but they get corrected.
- kpl0
indeed. cos I can back up my shit.
- unknown0
i think you're wrong there, AD. you can't patent the onClick event or the .html extension because those aren't processes that you developed.
This guy says he developed the pop-up ad, so he's gonna try and make some cash on it.
I don't know if i believe him or not, but really....no matter if it's a huge thing that everyone uses, someone had to invent it.
- AD0
so do you think someone invented the 'webpage' and should be able to patent it
I was being fecicious about the onClick event but using your logic - wouldn't someone have invented it however?