jrtom

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20081030150903555

and the conclusion (part 5 of 5) on this topic, which works as a place to start if you just want the bottom line:

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20081102011538422

We can hope...software and business method patents have always bugged me, not least because of what they've meant for employees of companies like Microsoft. (When I was working there, we were cautioned to _not_ try to find out if something that we were doing was covered by patent law, but to leave that to the lawyers (who can't really be expected to keep up with research in fields not their own)--because knowing about prior art could expose us to lawsuits. In addition to being an incredibly silly and efficient way to run a railroad, it is diametrically opposed to how research generally works. As far as I can tell, software patents are basically only used to keep other people from using your clever technique, rather than to derive a modest profit from having created it--and this is what trade secret law is for, IMAO.)

http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dgq5fdm5_10gmrn8f

This is hilarious...and also a nicely done indictment against DRM.

Michael Crichton, in the NY Times, This Essay Breaks the Law

Elevated homocysteine is linked to B-12 deficiency, so doctors should test homocysteine levels to see whether the patient needs vitamins.

ACTUALLY, I can't make that last statement. A corporation has patented that fact, and demands a royalty for its use. Anyone who makes the fact public and encourages doctors to test for the condition and treat it can be sued for royalty fees. Any doctor who reads a patient's test results and even thinks of vitamin deficiency infringes the patent. A federal circuit court held that mere thinking violates the patent.

*sigh* The US Patent Office needs a reboot...badly.