How do they enforce software patents when the source code is secret, and the software is web-based as opposed to running on the user’s device?
In: 0
Are you maybe confusing patents with copyright?
Enforcing a patent should have nothing to do with whether you copied anything from anybody.
Let’s pick a totally ridiculous hypothetical example, and say that some company was moronically granted [US Patent number 5960411](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1-Click) for allowing people to order something from a website using one click.
They don’t have to go through a separate “shopping cart” page or anything, just click once, and their product is ordered.
Of course no competent patent office would ever actually grant such a stupid patent, but we’ll just go with it for the sake of argument.
Now any time any other website tries to do the same thing, regardless if it’s done in the same way, regardless if they’ve even ever heard of this stupid patent before, they are in violation.
It’s incredibly simple to enforce: if anybody does anything similar to what you’ve described in your patent, that’s it.
No other proof needed.
You don’t have to prove that they copied the idea from you.
It can be (and very often is) a complete coincidence.
The source code is not patented. The processes or actions that the source code performs are. Most software isn’t even eligible to be patented.
Are you maybe confusing patents with copyright?
Enforcing a patent should have nothing to do with whether you copied anything from anybody.
Let’s pick a totally ridiculous hypothetical example, and say that some company was moronically granted [US Patent number 5960411](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1-Click) for allowing people to order something from a website using one click.
They don’t have to go through a separate “shopping cart” page or anything, just click once, and their product is ordered.
Of course no competent patent office would ever actually grant such a stupid patent, but we’ll just go with it for the sake of argument.
Now any time any other website tries to do the same thing, regardless if it’s done in the same way, regardless if they’ve even ever heard of this stupid patent before, they are in violation.
It’s incredibly simple to enforce: if anybody does anything similar to what you’ve described in your patent, that’s it.
No other proof needed.
You don’t have to prove that they copied the idea from you.
It can be (and very often is) a complete coincidence.
Are you maybe confusing patents with copyright?
Enforcing a patent should have nothing to do with whether you copied anything from anybody.
Let’s pick a totally ridiculous hypothetical example, and say that some company was moronically granted [US Patent number 5960411](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1-Click) for allowing people to order something from a website using one click.
They don’t have to go through a separate “shopping cart” page or anything, just click once, and their product is ordered.
Of course no competent patent office would ever actually grant such a stupid patent, but we’ll just go with it for the sake of argument.
Now any time any other website tries to do the same thing, regardless if it’s done in the same way, regardless if they’ve even ever heard of this stupid patent before, they are in violation.
It’s incredibly simple to enforce: if anybody does anything similar to what you’ve described in your patent, that’s it.
No other proof needed.
You don’t have to prove that they copied the idea from you.
It can be (and very often is) a complete coincidence.
Software patents are usually granted based on the utility and functionality of the software rather than the actual source code behind the software.
To give an example, if someone has patented a software that applies a particular effect to an audio file, the patent will usually cover the application of that effect to the music in the super-specific way that effect is applied, rather than the actual code that makes that effect work. If a company were to re-create the functionality of that software entirely, they would still be committing patent infringement regardless of the source code behind the product.
The source code is not patented. The processes or actions that the source code performs are. Most software isn’t even eligible to be patented.
The source code is not patented. The processes or actions that the source code performs are. Most software isn’t even eligible to be patented.
Software patents are usually granted based on the utility and functionality of the software rather than the actual source code behind the software.
To give an example, if someone has patented a software that applies a particular effect to an audio file, the patent will usually cover the application of that effect to the music in the super-specific way that effect is applied, rather than the actual code that makes that effect work. If a company were to re-create the functionality of that software entirely, they would still be committing patent infringement regardless of the source code behind the product.
Software patents are usually granted based on the utility and functionality of the software rather than the actual source code behind the software.
To give an example, if someone has patented a software that applies a particular effect to an audio file, the patent will usually cover the application of that effect to the music in the super-specific way that effect is applied, rather than the actual code that makes that effect work. If a company were to re-create the functionality of that software entirely, they would still be committing patent infringement regardless of the source code behind the product.
Latest Answers