Just in case you still thought that software and abstract/method patents were a good and sane idea promoting business and innovation… do read this article on Techdirt. This new troll approach is all about going after small businesses that offer Wi-Fi services. You know, your local coffee shop, your library, the hotel down the way.
It’s a simple extortion scheme: “Pay us a few grand and we won’t sue you.” Even if it wouldn’t hold up in court, a small business can’t afford the legal expense and is likely to simply pay up on demand. All of us will get targeted directly or indirectly by this nonsense, it really has to stop – be stopped.
This project is a good example of Upstarta principle#4: “Pragmatic on Intellectual Property (IP): speed-to-market over protection. Share information. No software patents.”
OpenCores.org host the source code for different digital hardware projects (IP-cores, System-on-Chip, boards, etc) and support the users with different tools, platforms, forums and other useful information.
Considering the complexity of designing and validating (debugging) these systems, the process becomes prohibitively expensive when done in-house, while fundamentally there’s nothing unique in there that must be hidden/protected to have a viable business model. So with benefits of cost as well as development speed, the openness becomes a true enabler: it allows startups and small businesses to consider this technology, which would otherwise be simply inconceivable.
Pay matters. How much you earn can determine your lifestyle, where you can afford to live, and your aspirations and status. But to what extent does what we get paid confer ‘worth’? Beyond a narrow notion of productivity, what impact does our work have on the rest of society, and do the financial rewards we receive correspond to this?
Ancient and recent advertising using this approach. It may be effective “leverage” over consumers, but I don’t believe “does it work” should be only criterion. What do you think?
Last year I got a letter from Queensland Motorways, announcing their “Exciting New Brand” (I kid you not). They’d renamed “E-Toll” in to “GO Via”. So this “brand” is about toll roads/bridges. Not really a product/service that you or I are likely to get more excited about.
I actually found the term E-Toll fairly good and descriptive: people know what toll is, and the E indicates it going electronic (mail -> Email). It’s clear.
GO Via on the other hand is some marketing or brand expert trying to be too smart and funny. I do get the word pun: Via = Road in Latin. Haha? I do love word puns, but use when appropriate! This one makes the brand non-descriptive of what it does (for most people), ditches the recognition of the old brand, and probably cost quite a bit of money to develop. For what purpose, and has it reached that objective? Was it likely to? Seems like a complete fail to me.
Business strategy, advice, mentoring. Making a life, not merely a living.
