[robinsoh]

> Every time an E Ink article is posted the patent defeatism is inevitable

Here, we go again. I've only read that here (repeatedly!) on HN and blogs that then cited throwaway HN posts which never respond to my requests for at least some verifiable evidence. Have a look through my comment history.

> that wouldn’t fall within the scope of E Ink’s defensible moat, or, if their parents are simply so broad

what moat? please tell me, I keep asking. To me, it looks like all of the people making these claims have no clue about the display industry. It would be the equivalent of me coming on a search engine forum and then alleging Microsoft of using a patent moat to prevent progress in operating systems, is that true? I have no clue but it sure sounds good even though I have 0 evidence. I hope my point is clear.

[WalterBright]

In the 70s, the oil companies were allegedly buying patents for 100mpg carburetors and locking them up so nobody could use them. I asked my dad (Air Force) about that, and he laughed. He said the military could desperately use such technology, as supplying fuel to the military machines was a terrible logistical problem. The military would never, ever let lil' ole' patent law get in the way of that.

[robinsoh]

I have no idea what you're trying to communicate. I reread your comment three times and I am still unsure.

[WalterBright]

It's a historical example of a fake patent moat.

[robinsoh]

And how is it evidence in this case?

[syshum]

What kind of evidence are you looking for?

History of full of example of patents slowing the deployment to technology, the latest clear example is 3d Printing which really only became affordable to the home user, and abel to be hackable by people doing novel things with it after the patents expired

I would assume the same thing would happen with eink

[robinsoh]

> What kind of evidence are you looking for?

Normally, the person making a claim or allegation supplies some evidence. You know like if I accused Microsoft of using patents for holding back operating system development, then you as presumably a software expert would rightly ask me for evidence. Is my point somehow unclear? Commenters on HN repeatedly make this claim and if you look at my comment history, each time I ask for evidence I get exactly your kind of reply or the link to that throwaway post (also on HN) and a blog article (that refers to that same throwaway post! infinite loop!) or best of all patents.google.com/search?q=eink . That suggests to me that these comments have no basis in evidence and the authors of the comments aren't even involved at any level of the display industry to understand what they're talking about.

> I would assume the same thing would happen with eink

Evidence?

[syshum]

So you are looking for active suppression. Aka law suits?

You deny a general chilling effect that patents have on the market overall? That people will, companies, and insterors will simply avoid patent encumbered technology

You simply refuse to acknowledge that generally accepted reality

//Sidenote. Stop asking me and others to look through your comment history. I am not going to do that. Make your points here and now

[robinsoh]

> You deny a general chilling effect that patents have on the market overall? That people will, companies, and insterors will simply avoid patent encumbered technology

So I can just simply say Microsoft has patents and therefore operating systems are not progressing because of that? You realize that's what you're claiming.

> You simply refuse to acknowledge that generally accepted reality

Your reality doesn't match mine. I work in the display industry.

> Stop asking me and others to look through your comment history.

I'm not going to spend my time educating you repeatedly.

[syshum]

>>So I can just simply say Microsoft has patents and therefore operating systems are not progressing because of that? You realize that's what you're claiming.

In part yes... Look at the suppression of UNIX do to SCO.. I mean hell this is recorded history. I am honestly surprised I need to even debate this. SCO effectively killed Unix, and harmed Linux and BSD

Software patents have a long history of suppression innovation in software

>Your reality doesn't match mine. I work in the display industry.

This new age of dueling realities is a false. There is only one reality, and mine is based on recorded historical fact, your is based on personal experience and anecdote

Mine is actual reality, yours is a belief

>I'm not going to spend my time educating you repeatedly.

Nor am I

[robinsoh]

> This new age of dueling realities is a false. There is only one reality, and mine is based on recorded historical fact, your is based on personal experience and anecdote

I'm confused. What "recorded historical facts" were provided for this claim that E Ink is using patents to prevent progress in the display industry?

> Mine is actual reality, yours is a belief

Ok. Good for you then.