January 28, 2005
Evil Google patent?
Google receives patent on highlighting search results. Sounds evil to me. Not what we're taught to expect by Google marketing. I hate Google bashing personally, too many are doing it too badly, but this should at least be watched for abuse.
On the other hand, these guys have a more relaxed attitude towards evil, while these guys can't seem to make up their mind.
If you live in Europe: Just say no. These people can help you do that.
Posted by Claus at January 28, 2005 12:23 AM
Wouldn't you go for the patent, say, if you founded Google and experienced competitors basically copying your concept with almost no alterations ? honestly?
And, if you wouldn't go for the patent, what would you do, if any?
I think that software is protected by the difficulty in making in - as described here: http://www.classy.dk/log/archive/001162.html
If you can't outinvent your competitors you should lose.
A patent such as this is obviously bogus. Its just a legal tactic, and we would al be better off if people just invented and didn't invest in silly tactics like this.
Come to think of it, this is a PRIME example of what should not be patentable. It takes about 2 minutes to come up with the idea. It takes considerable effort to implement it in a globally available search engine.
The cost is in exploiting the idea, NOT in having the idea. Therefore any reinventer could not fairly be characterized as a free rider - he has almost all the same costs the original inventor had. If he is better at implementing this feature the world wins (and he wins). If he's not - he won't win.
With patents we're stuck with the original inventors solution, even if it was not really very well done.