German court says nein to Apple's slide-to-unlock patent Apple's slide-to-unlock patent has been ruled invalid by a German court because it's not really an "innovation" in the eyes of European patent law. The Bundespatentgericht (federal patent court) in Munich ruled that the famous patent is invalid because European law doesn't allow for the patenting of software that doesn't …
........I am not just talking about Cupertino. It is becoming increasingly clear that "The Man" in both the States and in the EU has finally begun to wake up with regard to the way that "BigCorp" (not just the "Patent Trolls") are taking the piss out of patent law. Splendid, shame it took the high profile nature (media-wise) of Apple's fairly shameless judicial carpet-bombing of their rivals (notably you-know-who) to make them wake up. Despite the fact that I do not have very much time for the fruity company I would be the last to pretend that they are the only guilty parties. It is not just the classic patent troll who is at work here - it is the entire fucking industry who is playing this particular tune and it is about time our authorities took notice.
Actually, no, they're not. See the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. Copyright is generally active for the lifetime of the person who created the work, plus fifty years after death (normally via his/her estate), and a fixed period of length (this fixed period isn't fixed in the convention, if I recall correctly) for companies, etc. Various national laws giver different forms of work different periods of protection, but in no jurisdictions that I'm aware of, does such protection last for ever. I stand, or course, to be corrected by those who actually know better than this layman!
>Actually, no, they're not.
Erm, I think you missed the sarcasm...
Copyrights are now so long, there is little practical difference.
And just wait until Steamboat Willie comes up due for the public domain treatment, an extension will be pushed through in the US, undoubtedly.
Bzzz! WRONG!
If you are going to object to an objectionable piece of legislation, please get your easily available facts right. It's life plus 70 years for a creator owned piece, 95 years from publication or 120 from creation for a corporate owned piece (whichever is shorter).
..and renewable every 20 years until the end of time.
Sounds like forever to me, after all they wanted it to be forever.
"Sonny Bono wanted the term of copyright protection to last forever. I am informed by staff that such a change would violate the Constitution. ... As you know, there is also [then-MPAA president] Jack Valenti's proposal for term to last forever less one day. "
In 2023 when Mickey Mouse is set to drop into public domain (again), you honestly think it will, if so have I got a bridge to sell you.
Sorry world, this is the fault of the US public. We have allowed Corporations to run our country, even to the point where they have granted themselves personhood. Out of this "Do whatever we want" attitude they are allowed to patent anything that comes as common sense, even with tons of prior art. Rounded black edges patentable? Really? REALLY? Bottom line is the majority of our public are either too stupid or too lazy to do anything about it. At least Europe seems to have a more level head about some of this stuff. The Corporation lawyers are busy trying to out litigate each other while the Patent Office is either staffed with the mental equivalent of 3rd graders or paid off. Either way stupidity reigns and it is our fault.
This post has been deleted by its author
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
