|
|
|
|
|
by SEMW
1758 days ago
|
|
The problem is that that's not how the patent system works. If the Sonos patent is upheld, it doesn't just stop google from making speakers that synchronize their clocks with each other over a local area network.[0] It stops literally everyone other than Sonos doing that, for 20 years since the patent was filed. Even lone engineers working in their garages. Even if they independently reinvent it, patent infringement doesn't require copying, or even knowledge that the original system or the patent existed. Even if synchronizing clocks is something any skilled distributed systems engineer would think of within 10s of deciding to design such a system.[1] It gives sonos a monopoly over the entire idea, that they can enforce against the world. It's like cheering a law that allows anyone who wore a violet shirt in the last month to be shot, because you know someone who wore a violet shirt who you think deserved it. Maybe, but laws apply to everyone, and you're poisoning the commons just to fuck over that one person. [0] https://patents.google.com/patent/US9195258B2 [1] the mechanism claimed being obvious to someone skilled in the art should be a reason the patent is not valid, but US courts appear to have a history of making that difficult to prove. |
|
Except the patent you link to doesn't sync the clocks.