Innovation cost and imitation costs are *not* the same in software. The fact that some software is open does not change this. The threat of litigation *should* stop those like Samsung from copying others as they do. There is no reason the Samsungs of the world cannot come up with their own innovative solutions (and in some areas Samsung does!)
Alex whines about the current system of protection but offers no other way for innovative companies to protect their investments… and such protected innovations benefit the whole tech industry.
With that said, the tech world moves fast. 20 years seems a long time. I think 10 would make sense. And no Disney-style IP protection extensions. Those are just idiotic. But, Alex, speak of solutions – do not just whine about how things are.
Microsoft's charm offensives against Free/libre software are proving to be rather effective, despite them involving a gross distortion of facts and exploitation of corruptible elements in the corporate media
A British MEP criticises Battistelli and the management of the European Patent Office (EPO) while Baroness Lucy Neville-Rolfe, UK Minister for Intellectual Property, gets closer to Battistelli in a tactless effort to improve relations
Vista 10 in the headlines as its marketing propaganda zones in on false perceptions around cost, aided in part by longtime foes of GNU/Linux such as Gartner, especially its Microsoft-embedded elements (Michael Silver and co-workers)
Amid highly misleading security-centric reports that rely on Microsoft's bogus number of vulnerabilities (Microsoft already admitted hiding many of them) Techrights presents recent news about Windows 'security'