Chris Cera - Latest Comments

Re: Switched from Wordpress to Octopress - Christopher D. Cera

Gabriel Quintana — Tue, 06 Jun 2023 22:38:14 -0000

Envíos Gratis en el día ✓ Compre Cera Para Barba en cuotas sin interés! Conozca nuestras increíbles ofertas y promociones en millones de productos.

Re: Christopher D. Cera · Letter to USPTO on Software Patents

Andrew Polar — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 10:43:10 -0000

The cost of 60,000 per patent and 5 years for processing is the worst case scenario. I have software patent 7315266 (now expired). I applied for myself without attorney, paid only fee, near 1600, get it granted in a year after filing. Software patents are not that dramatic. It is simple pseudo-activity. There are many other pseudo activity in our life, such as ladies purses production or election activity. Now I conduct research in processing of natural languages. I have list of patents on my site http://semanticsearchart.co... and I can easy circumvent each of them. Those who want to obtain a new patent are very wellcome to spend 60k, those who wish to know how to get around them can pay me consulting fee 100/hour and get solution very quick.

Re: Dare to be under-employed

Chris Cera — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:22:41 -0000

Thanks for the feedback!

Re: Dare to be under-employed

Ivo — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 03:30:39 -0000

Wow excellent presentation, all the professional options in one place. With a bit of smash to the ego for the people who are too scared of being under-employed, hooked on monthly salary like drug.

Re: Christopher D. Cera · Letter to USPTO on Software Patents

Chris Cera — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 20:02:21 -0000

Thanks for the compliment, and glad that you read the letter.

Re: Christopher D. Cera · Letter to USPTO on Software Patents

Chris Cera — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 10:57:50 -0000

I really appreciate those references. Good to know regarding their work on large vs small startups.

Re: Christopher D. Cera · Letter to USPTO on Software Patents

Erik E — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:57:06 -0000

Great letter! I think you expressed why software patents are bad better than a lot of other texts I have read. I might add that I think arstechinca reviewed a book that showed that for most first the cost of protecting patents in courts cost more than what was gained from having it.

I am sure most will ask, why get patents in the first place? I believe this is a classic example of prisoners dilemma, from game theory. All companies would be better of if they didn't take out patents but since you can't trust your next company wont do it, your optimum strategy becomes to do it yourself even if in the long run it hurts everybody.

Re: Christopher D. Cera · Letter to USPTO on Software Patents

Wwilkins — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 21:08:20 -0000

bravo!

Re: Christopher D. Cera · Letter to USPTO on Software Patents

vivzizi — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 19:20:06 -0000

My suggestion to them would be

don't allow any software as a patent unless it actually transforms the machine from a computer to another use it's makers did not intend from programming (ie if you write a program to run a processor all the time to make it overheat and turn the computer into a space heater that might be patentable -until I published it. but every programmable hardware maker and every compiler maker and every computer language maker expects all manner of reprogramming and merely doing it or exploiting features in languages in specific ways should not be patentable.

If they don't accept that then.

no software patent should ever be given for merely programming something that already exists in the real world. This would mean for example no patent on programming a virtual bookshelf as a way to visually select a virtual book to read becuase real bookshelves already do that for real books.

if they don't accept that

any patent on software should have to prove not just that there is no evidence it was invented before but actually that it was not an obvious solution. (perhaps a blind "programmers test similar to medical testing of medicine should be required where 200 programmers are paid or recruited or rewarded on an open website to devise solutions within the constraints and none must produce the similar programming method.)

if they don't like that then

patents applications on software should be free so that all programmers can apply for them without cost to level the playing field ( I actually believe all patents should be free to encourage the dissemination of innovation by poor inventors who now hide their inventions but that's another issue - you should charge for the grown corn not the planting of the seed and for human progress making people pay for patents is like making them pay to plant corn before the crop has produced yield.)

if they don't like that patents should be for a VERY short time period like maybe 2 years and should NOT apply to anyone who has already put into place an infringing solution before the patent is issued. Additionally the fact that others have put in place an infringing solution before a software patent is issued should be prima fascia evidence that the patent was obvious and therefore the patent should automatically revert to denied unless the inventor can make a case why it shouldn't .

the patent office should require some automated search system of pseudo code of the patent applied software against an established bank of all software and software printed materials it can get people to volunteer to pattern match for a similar previous solution. pseudo code will debablize software in a patent app and make it's true nature more obvious. all software is simply loops and branches and most patents today are simply patenting what variables are in the loops and branches which where designed by the compiler or language designer to be infinitely variable by most patent examiners don't realize this. Pseudo code matching will help them realize this.

all software patents should be forced to reduce their "invention" to a standardized pseudo code devoid of specific variables to test for true originality.

vivzizi
http://www.vivzizi.com

Re: Christopher D. Cera · Letter to USPTO on Software Patents

Pete Thomas — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 12:50:02 -0000

Hi Christopher,

I agree with the sentiment of your message but regarding the assumption that small companies make up the "sector that generates the most jobs" there is this Who Creates Jobs? Small vs. Large vs. Young study http://www.nber.org/papers/... that claims "once we control for firm age there is no systematic relationship between firm size and growth."

The NY Times piece where I saw mention of it is here http://www.nytimes.com/2010... and the authors contend "any serious discussion of job creation, it seems, should look at the business tactics and policy steps that are most likely to nurture more of these promising corporate upstarts."

If we buy their argument, the fact that the smalls are burdened with this particular tactic (defensive software patents) in order to be/stay viable is a hurdle to traverse but not necessarily an inhibitor to the flow of our economy's "life-blood".

I'd like to know whether or not the USPTO, as an arguably (indirect?) steward of our economy, even views the software smalls as worthy of special consideration. If this is the extent of their thoughts on the matter: http://www.uspto.gov/smallb... it's a myopic view, e.g. "It has never been more essential for you to consider patenting your idea or registering your name as a trademark, especially if you are a small business."

In any case thanks for taking the time to send this message to the USPTO and here's to hoping they take your arguments under advisement.

Re: About Me

Nathaniel — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 04:55:05 -0000

I am totally biting your style, yo.

Re: begin {}

seggy — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 02:12:04 -0000

Do I win at life? :)

Re: begin {}

Chris Cera — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 22:46:13 -0000

Thanks alot, and congratulations on being my first commenter!

Re: begin {}

seggy — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:37:33 -0000

Looks good dude.