http://mathewingram.disqus.com/enMon, 08 May 2006 16:59:27 -0000http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/04/18/software-patents-and-innovation-2/#comment-1293534Well done!<br><a href="http://vhgbbjca.com/isjq/nozv.html" rel="nofollow">http://vhgbbjca.com/isjq/nozv.html</a> | <a href="http://htlqievi.com/oimz/nhdc.html" rel="nofollow">http://htlqievi.com/oimz/nhdc.html</a>ChadMon, 08 May 2006 16:59:27 -0000http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/04/18/software-patents-and-innovation-2/#comment-1293533The patent problem is indeed vexing, and part of a broader and growing class of problems I label as "IP squatting". The thicket is easy to see. What's hard is getting out of it.<br><br><a href="http://myownpirateradio.com/2006/04/17/ip-squatting/ " rel="nofollow">One possible partial solution</a> is to force patent owners to implement within a reasonable time or yield their hold on an IP claim. Of course that has its drawbacks too; for instance, what if you're a great inventor but not a good implementor? On the whole, though, it feels one step closer to a fix.Oshoma MomohSat, 22 Apr 2006 12:45:34 -0000