There is an era of patents from the late 90s through the early-mid-00s that were insanely vague and rarely stand up to scrutiny, but most are expiring at this point, if they haven’t already. Generally, though, patents are not granted on “concepts” but on implementations. That’s a sometimes ambiguous line, but that’s a fundamental principle of modern patents.
Yes, Hamas should be blamed for seizing and refusing to release hostages effectively gained via an ill conceived pogrom that no one could possibly have expected to have had any different of an outcome than it has had. The most accurate and reasonable observation that I saw after the October raid was simply, “Hamas just shot every Palestinian in the dick.”
With that said, none of this excuses Israel and the IDF’s response, regardless of his predictable it has been. Nor does it excuse an increasingly ethnofascist apartheid state.
Not great, so people should continue to apply pressure. And not just over Palestine, but over all MIC capture of our government. Otoh, this administration and hopefully Harris’ will continue it is one of the most union friendly in living memory and the FTC has been insanely active. If we’re lucky, we might even see the return of the CFPB as a legitimate and effective entity. So your characterization is beyond brain dead.
Oh wow, this suit is shaping up to be silly. I didn’t realize it was filed in Japan, too. That makes the patent aspect even shakier. Japan has no discovery process like in the US, which is generally very necessary for many software-related patents as, assuming they have a strong likelihood of surviving challenge, they are typically drawn to processes that are completely obfuscated from the user and outside observes.