Re: "My dad is a pirate." but "Mark Kent is a clueless moron."

[Troy Kirkland]

Title fixed accordingly.


"Troy Kirkland" <kirk@google.com> wrote in message news:...
>
> "Hadron" <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in message 
> news:fpuq25$c23$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>> Mark Kent <mark.kent@demon.co.uk> writes:
>>


>>>>
>>>> The same should go for patents.
>>>
>>> The first thing to consider is whether patent should ever be 
>>> transferrable
>>> from the original inventor.  To my mind, if a company employs someone
>>> who invents something, that invention should remain the property of
>>> that person, and the company should license it from them, similarly, it
>>> should not be possible to sell on patents to patent trolling companies
>>> like Acacia, or anyone else, for that matter.
>>>
>>> It's about time that ownership of such things was returned to the real
>>> inventors...
>>
>> If ever there was a time that Mark Kent revealed himself to be a troll
>> it is now.
>>
>> Listen to what he is saying : a company who employs someone is not
>> entitled to the things that that employee is paid to work on. He is
>> is a troll or absolutely making it with a tele-tubbie.
>
> Absolutely amazing. Just when I thought that nobody could be more clueless 
> than Schestowitz or "Mark S. Bilk" this Kent troll comes along with this 
> hillarious suggestion.
>
> Aside from the blatant stupidity... it simply makes zero sense at all. 
> Take for example some research being done at IBM. The researcher is being 
> paid a salary by IBM. The company (IBM) is also the one funding the 
> research and "assuming the risk" because it's completely likely that the 
> research might not pan out in the end. Depending on the research being 
> done, the cost of the facilities and equipment could easily run $10's of 
> millions of dollars which is yet another investment that IBM is making.
>
> According to the Kent idiot... if something is discovered or invented from 
> all of this then IBM who paid the salary and put up all of the investment 
> and took all of the risk, they would be nothing! The researcher would get 
> to keep everything and simply walk out the door.
>
> This is just absurd! No wonder that Mark Kent is an unemployed janitor. 
> What a sort of idiot would even suggest something so stupid.
>
>
>> FWIW, I do agree with stopping the selling of patents to a degree. Use
>> it or lose it in other words.
>
> Couldn't this be gotten around by granting an exclusive "license" to the 
> patent which would effectively be the same thing. And companies do license 
> patents all the time which is completely valid as far as I'm concerned.
>
>
>
> 



-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com