Close the patent office right now!

by John Wilker in Business, I am a Consumer, Technology

This AppleInsider post is further proof, that the patent system is 100% flawed.

MONEC Holding Ltd, can rot in hell. I’ve never heard of them, and based on their website I’m guessing they’re nothing more than a patent troll.

Basically, they’re suing Apple (Not Amazon) for hyping the iPod/iPhone as a touch screen eBook reader. Something they patented in 2002. What’s wrong with that? Well in 7 years they’ve got nothing to show, clearly and their patent is clearly as vague as possible.

“dimensions such that […] approximately one page of a book can be illustrated at normal size, this display being integrated in a flat, frame-like housing.”

“Electronic device, preferably an electronic book.”

Emphasis mine, but really? That’s a patent? “I’ll build something that’s sorta like a book, but maybe a touch screen in some kind of frame, and it’ll display ebooks probably.”


Not only should they not have been awarded a patent in the first place, but I strongly maintain that any patent awarded on vaporware should have a life of no more than 5 years. If you can’t execute your idea in 5 years (Less actually, but 5 is easy to use) move aside and let someone else with the means to innovate take a stab at it.

Our patent process is such an innovation killer! Apple certainly does their fair share of patent craziness, but they actualy, eventually execute on a lot of them. Some they don’t and those should also go back into the pool in 5 years.

Patents are rediculous, I challange anyone to show me a patent that’s done good. That hasn’t stifled innovation, that hasn’t locked out competition, for completely stupid reasons, or isn’t just plain stupid (patenting a click, or a molecule, color, shape, etc)

2 Responses to “Close the patent office right now!”

  1. Harry says:

    I suggest that we hang on a few years until my latest filings get rolled through, THEN close it.

    Clearly a patent is a valuable thing to have because it creates leverage in the market place. Without the value of a patent, I don't think my employer would be as inclined to hire me to innovate.

    My employer might not be big enough to make a single announcement at a single tradeshow and start a multi-million dollar business branch in the first year. But if they have a patent that's valuable in the industry, at least they get their fair share of something when a company that's too big to compete with bulldozes through the marketplace.

  2. John Wilker says:

    I disagree. Big, small whatever, if a company can't execute in 5 years, too bad. I'd prefer no patents, but a time limit should be a short term goal. I mean look at MONEC. 7 years? That's innovation killing. In 7 years there should be a prototype at least. Not a mock up, a fully functional prototype. Prototype == extension.

    Let's face it most big companies that can bulldoze aren't the innovators, they wait until some one else does something cool.

%d bloggers like this: