Now, of course, IANAL. But in these discussions, I always hear 'ignore the abstract, look at the claims'.
The claims describe "An image-capturing mobile device".
GNOME makes software that could be used on such a device, but surely no-one can claim that software _is_ a mobile device?
Claim 4 _could_ apply to the software, except it still says "mobile device" in that claim as well.
This is all without even considering how ludicrous the "invention" being claimed is. I'm pretty sure I could choose to transmit only some photos, based on date, from my phone way before 2008.
The claims describe "An image-capturing mobile device".
GNOME makes software that could be used on such a device, but surely no-one can claim that software _is_ a mobile device?
Claim 4 _could_ apply to the software, except it still says "mobile device" in that claim as well.
This is all without even considering how ludicrous the "invention" being claimed is. I'm pretty sure I could choose to transmit only some photos, based on date, from my phone way before 2008.