I am (to my regret) on Microsoft's side here. The patent in question is vague and shouldn't have been granted. Also there was prior art which should invalidate the patent.
Also, per:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_re_Bilski
patents on pure software processes aren't legal. I HATE software patents as companies patent hundreds of obvious ideas, wait for some of them to be used by a major IT company then jump on them and sue them for $$$. Microsoft has used software patents to threaten Linux for example, and software patents mean you CAN'T LEGALLY PLAY MP3s without paying a ~$15 license fee to some company. You might not think you paid it, but it's included in the cost of Windows with every PC. But without these illegal patents you wouldn't have to pay.
Software patents are only in the US, but American companies export the consequences of them to other countries.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
