On 6/2/07, Russell Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Software patents are good in the software field in the same way that
engineering patents are good in the engineering field. My argument is that the situations are analogous. You have not demonstrated a qualitative difference as to why software patents should be treated as a special case.
For the fourth time, I repeat that I make no claim that software patents
should be treated as a special case - nor that they should not be. I don't comment either way, because I freely admit I lack the knowledge to do so. I comment only on the industry that I know about.
Speaking of which - are you, or have you ever been, a professional
hardware engineer? If so, then I will attach some weight to your claim that patents are good in hardware engineering.
> > That seems to be a bit exaggerated: I don't think my AGI design
infringes on many patents
If you ever get to the point of having an implementation or detailed
design, and if you check carefully, you'll find it infringes on a great many patents indeed. Well... let's try to avoid an argument here... I'm not a professional in *anything* yet =) All I'm saying is that software patents seem to be morally OK *in principle*. In reality, patents may not be our group's central strategy at all. We may file a few if we have exceptionally good ideas. About 3 years ago I was preparing to file a neural learning algorithm patent, but my idea turned out to be not that good. Why debate something when we arn't even near that stage? YKY ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=231415&user_secret=e9e40a7e
