Microsoft patents drop-in split-screen

[Mendicate Bias]

said:

Mendicate Bias said:

Words Of Wisdom said:

For someone giving a lesson on , you're fairly ignorant of the matter.

Please research "first-to-file" versus "first-to-invent" before your next post in this thread or any other on this topic.

lol your so arrogant you really don't even bother reading do you? First of all almost every country besides the U.S. uses a first to file system. Secondly you clearly have no idea what the first to invent system is, you probably just read a little excerpt on wikipedia and think your an expert. The first to invent system only applies if the inventor works to make a statement directly after making the invention. The inventor can not create the invention make no effort to patent it and then decide he is going to declare his right to a patent after somone else patents his method. The only real application for the first to invent system is to protect the inventor from having a larger corporation push through a patent for his invention faster than he could due to having far more resources and lawyers.

Now please go do some research before you ever bother responding to my posts again, I don't like talking to ignorant people.

Microsoft is based in the U.S. and is likely filing the majority of its patents in the U.S. The patent system of the U.S. is the most relevant one to any discussion regarding the company as it is and has been the grounds in which many (Microsoft) patents are challenged.

Next, the highlighted portion of your statement is wrong. The inventor does not have to patent it upon invention otherwise it's still first-to-file. The essential difference between first-to-file and first-to-invent is that the inventor can use the invention thereby establashing what is known as "prior art" and laying defacto claim to it. If I begin selling frizbees in 2000 and you file a patent on frizbees in 2001, then your patent is void because I established "prior art" by practicing my invention (selling it).

I did not say the inventor has to file a patent but that they have to work to make a statement directly or soon after the invention. They can not make the invention, make money off the invention for years and then file a patent after their competitor figures out how to make their product. There is a law against that, I'll look it up and post it when I find it. So basicaly the inventor has to show proof of a statement towards a patent application soon after invention but do not neccesarily require the patent its self.