blockchain technology

Technology patents stifle innovation. You might have heard this, and the arguments surrounding it, since the very first software patents were issued. So far, however, the average individual in the United States hasn't noticed really noticed the reach that intellectual property law protection has inside their everyday lives. In the end, one does not miss innovation that's been crushed ahead of the product's shipment to the supply chain. The "wouldn't it be nice if we had something similar to this" thought doesn't normally cause a seek out that item just to get that someone tried to produce it but was stopped either by being threatened with the high cost of patent infringement, threats of never ending lawsuits centered on copyright or other claims, or even threats of federal legislation that will leave their product useless. blockchain software

Today, however, as opposed to squelching potential technology, patent law works extremely well to prohibit the utilization of technology that already exists and is being used by people around the world - the Blackberry. Given what's at stake, the publicity truly can't hurt, and will more than likely assist the fans of innovation inside their proverbial fight to generate while steering free from intellectual property restrictions. The more those who know what is happening, the more most will clamor for change in intellectual property law.

It is rather dangerous for BlackBerry users. An organization called NTP is asking for the court to enforce an injunction which would prohibit the sale of BlackBerries in the United States, and would also shut down email to all or any users except for US government account holders. Ironically, this would mean that the US Patent and Trademark Office and the federal judges hearing this case would continue to own email access while ruling on whether that privilege will be granted to the others people mere mortals. Since a three judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington already ruled that RIM, makers of the BlackBerry, was in violation of seven of NTP's patents, things don't look great for BlackBerry users at this time, especially when the USPTO upholds the validity of the patents in question. 

The story is just a typical one - a pc software patent on technology already being used but packaged in ways that the US Patent and Trademark Office didn't recognize as "prior art," held with a company whose sole job is to collect such patents and use them as clubs against any business who creates something using technology that the patent was wrongly granted to protect. This story happens over and over in a typical year in the United States, but rarely has it been taken this far, regarding an item this popular.blockchainsoftware

Patent law, and other intellectual property law was created in order to foster innovation and production of products in the United States. By granting a limited time monopoly on technology used to make certain products or services, the public received the best to utilize the technology uninhibited once the patent term (usually 17 years from the patent's issue date) has run out. In the times before computers and software applications, 17 years may have been a fine period of time. It may still be considered a fair period of time for many products that have taken years to produce and research, such as for instance drugs. However, when talking about fundamental foundations common to MANY items that are powered by computer software, waiting 17 years may as well kill any hopes of development or innovation in just about any fields even remotely touched by the patents.

Looking only at that from a company perspective, back when I was in law school, I was told a conservative estimate of expense this 1 could be prepared to incur from the patent lawsuit will be around $125,000.00. Element of the reason for this really is due to the scarcity of patent attorneys, the problem of finding expert witnesses (who are often quite expensive), and the necessity to obtain technologically competent judges. Regardless, when threatened with approximately $125,000.00 in legal fees, most small firms (where much of the technology innovation arises from these days) will undoubtedly be loathe to roll the dice on an untested possible product. Only threat might be adequate, regardless of whether the tiny company feels that the suit will be won because the merchandise is not using protected technology. Of course, which means that the consumer will undoubtedly be denied the opportunity to decide on these items, as they will never reach the marketplace.